Thoughts from the Israel Street

2012-01-05T07:30:00.001-08:00

May the Best (Wo)Man Win
By Sherwin Pomerantz

The Republican party’s primaries in Iowa earlier this week provided the world, once more, with an example of the strength of the democratic system in the United States. There were, of course, far too many candidates although this early in the presidential race that is generally the norm. Given the results, with the winner claiming victory by just 8 votes, no one can logically say that the decision of the electorate there pointed to a clear leader. Rather the message was that the voters really were undecided and couldn’t identify solidly with any one candidate over another.

But the strength of the system manifests itself in the fact that the election was fair, the results are not being contested and no one is suggesting that they be retroactively cancelled.

Not so in Israel. Take the case of the process for selecting judges for Israel’s supreme court. The panel of legal eagles composing the group that makes recommendations for the supreme court has traditionally included two representatives of the Israel Bar Association. Those representatives are voted upon by the bar’s membership at large at the same time that they vote for a new president of the association. The last time this occurred was in 2011 at which time the membership chose their two representatives to this important panel.

Now along comes the Minister of Justice, Yaakov Ne’eman, a Netanyahu appointee who is not a member of the Knesset of Israel, and decides that the two people selected by the bar association are not to his liking, not from his party and do not espouse his political views. To address this problem he proposes legislation to make it mandatory that the two representatives from the bar be one from the party in power and one from opposition which, if enacted, would then give his party the majority on the current selection committee. In principle, of course, this is an obvious example of gross political meddling in the judicial selection process.

But the proposed law went even further. Unhappy with waiting until the next time the bar has its elections, the Minister of Justice added conditions to the proposed law that, if enacted, would nullify the earlier elections of the bar and force them to be rescheduled in order to meet his particular political agenda.

As one might expect there was a major uproar in the land about this obviously biased and unfair piece of legislation which, until yesterday, was supported as well by the prime minister. But, surprisingly, there were a significant number of senior people in the prime minister’s own party who recognized this as a potential act in violation of the democratic principles on which Israel was founded. Even the attorney general opined that when the law would be challenged in court, as it surely would have been, he would not be able to defend it. Under that kind of pressure the prime minister had no recourse but to withdraw his support for the bill, even though it had already passed its first reading, virtually eliminating is potential for passage.

But no one here is applauding the prime minister for this action. He could have received well-deserved accolades had he refrained from supporting the bill in the first place purely on moral grounds. To withdraw his support in the face of public and party pressure, while laudable for its result, rather than at the point when the legislation was introduced, speaks to the moral bankruptcy of the government in power.

In an earlier blog I mentioned that from this writer’s perspective the country is on a slippery slope away from democracy. While many people agreed with me there were some who criticized me for being overly influenced by the left of center press here. But I do not accept that criticism. Slowly but surely the very flimsy separation of powers here, which is not nearly as well defined as it is in the US, are becoming less and less sharp. The danger of such slippage is a move away from democracy and the situation described here is just one example.

Edmund Burke was correct when he said “whenever a separation is made between liberty and justice, neither, in my opinion, is safe.” Those who seek to separate the two imperil the future of the nation.

2011-12-26T06:48:00.001-08:00

Woe to Those who Remain Silent
By Sherwin Pomerantz

With apologies to Pastor Martin Niemöller who used this literary style to talk about the roundup of communists, trade unionists, and Jews in Nazi Germany, I submit the following vis-à-vis the slippery slope down which we seem to be sliding here in Israel.

• First they asked that their brightest young men be excused from military service because there are so few of them that it won’t make any difference, and I didn’t speak out because there were, indeed, so few of them.
• Then they refused to teach their children mathematics, English and other secular subjects, and I didn’t speak out because they have a right to live their lives the way they want.
• Then they decided it was better for their men to study than to work and they secured state support for their learning, and I didn’t speak out because there were, indeed so few of them.
• Then they demanded separate seating on buses, men in the front and women in the back, and I didn’t speak out because I don’t ride the busses.
• Then they put up a separation in their neighborhoods during holiday periods and asked the women to walk on one side and the men on the other, and I didn’t speak out because I never go to those neighborhoods.
• Then some Ashkenazi religious schools refused to admit Sephardi religious students because they were not religious enough, and I didn’t speak out because I don’t have children of school age.
• Then they demonstrated against having parking lots open on the Sabbath outside Old City of Jerusalem to handle the many tourists who come there, and I didn’t speak out because I don’t drive on the Sabbath anyway.
• Then they told Manny, after causing tens of thousands of dollars of damage to his Jerusalem store, that in his book store of religious volumes he has to take certain books off his shelves because they are “Zionist” books and he has to put up a sign advising women to dress modestly, because his English books attract immodest tourists, and I didn’t speak out because I never go there anyway.
• Then they spat on and insulted religious girls going to elementary school because the girls don’t wear stockings, and I didn’t speak out because I don’t live in that city.
• Next they will tell me how I must live my life and, there are now so many of them, that I will have no choice but to do so if I want to continue living here.

My friends will see this and tell me that I am exaggerating. They will tell me that all of this is the work of a small group of zealots in each location who don’t represent the mainstream religious community. And they will be correct in saying this. But if this is a correct analysis of the situation then where are the mainstream rabbis speaking out against such coercive behavior? Where are the political leaders insisting that the police arrest individuals who threaten and cause harm to others in the name of religion? Why are there no arrests when vandalism causes property damage and potential danger to life and limb?

The dictionary tells us that a zealot is a person who is fanatical and uncompromising in the pursuit of their religious, political or other ideals. But history teaches us that generally zealots are inimical to the long term good and welfare of society.

Former US Senator Robert Byrd, who held the record as the longest serving senator in the history of the United States, said it best when he opined “It is the duty of each citizen to be vigilant, to protect liberty, to speak out, left and right, and disagree lest he be trampled underfoot by misguided zealotry and extreme partisanship.”

There is a lesson to be learned here and those of us who value the democratic principles to which we are committed, have an obligation to protest any encroachment on those rights by any member of the society in which we live. We can do no less nor do we have the right to remain silent. Woe to those who remain silent in the face of bigotry.

2011-12-23T03:08:00.001-08:00

Treasonable Conduct….or Not?
By Sherwin Pomerantz

Yesterday, Israel’s Attorney General, Yehuda Weinstein, advised the Prime Minister that for lack of prosecutorial evidence he was abandoning his investigation of the activities of MK Hanin Zuabi and her participation in the Mavi Marmara Flotilla of May 2010 which was intended to break the blockade of Gaza.

Can you believe that?

A member of the Parliament of Israel representing the Arab Balad party chooses to sail on a ship as part of a flotilla whose aim is to oppose what even the UN said is a legitimate action on the part of the Israeli government and the Israeli Attorney General basically finds nothing unlawful about it. Zuabi, of course, denies that she knew anything about the fact that the ship on which she was a passenger had a significant cache of weapons and was ready for a serious confrontation with the Israel Defense Forces. You can see evidence of her participation and knowledge by going to:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX8-zEO1TNU

When questioned after the event she said “Those who send the army to stop the flotilla should be brought before international tribunals (for trial).” As if that was not sufficient to question her commitment to the law she pledged to uphold when she was sworn in to the Knesset, hear what she had to say in November when she spoke at the Russell Tribunal on Palestine in Capetown. There she referred to the country in whose parliament she serves as the “Racist political and legal regime in Israel.”

Or some of her other comments at the time which included:

“It is part of the ideology of Israel to be racist”
“It is the policy of Israel to seclude and deport us” (referring to Palestinians)
“But actually I am saying that Israel is worse than an apartheid state.”

Given all of this it is certainly strange that our attorney general says he can find no grounds for further action. Really? Is this not treason? The dictionary says that treason is “a violation of allegiance to one’s sovereign or one’s state.” Isn’t it obvious that participating in a flotilla designed to break the blockade of Gaza which is a policy of the government in which you serve treason? Doesn’t that constitute a violation of allegiance to one’s state? Can it be any clearer?

When questioned about all of this Zuabi regularly invokes her parliamentary immunity and states that in a democracy she has a right to state her opinions, even if they differ from those of the government.

Democracy is committed to the free expression of opinion even if that opinion is negative about the country in which one lives. But that is an entirely different situation than the breaking of the law by someone who is sworn to uphold it by dint of his or her participation in a country’s parliament. One cannot hide behind parliamentary immunity by invoking such immunity while being disloyal to the country in whose parliament he or she serves. That borders on treason and the attorney general should not have dropped the case regardless of the concern for the consequences in the Arab street. In the end, democracy and Israel will both pay the price of such legal negligence.

2011-12-19T06:46:00.001-08:00

As the Holidays Approach
By Sherwin Pomerantz

Friends, on Tuesday evening Jews worldwide will kindle the first candle on the Chanukah menorah to commemorate the victory of good over evil, of honesty over lies and of the belief that miracles do happen. Someone once said that a menorah is like the nightlight of our people. In times of darkness it shines on the whole world reminding us not to be afraid to be different but to be proud of whom we are.

For Christians worldwide Friday will wind down rapidly to Christmas eve and the promise of peace on earth, good will towards (wo)men that still eludes us. Charles Dickens described the eternal allure of Christmas when he wrote in 1836’s Pickwick Papers “Happy, happy Christmas, that can win us back to the delusions of our childish days; that can recall to the old man the pleasures of his youth; that can transport the sailor and the traveler, thousands of miles away, back to his own fire-side and his quiet home!”

Certainly for all of us it is a time of memory, a time for a bit of reflection and perhaps even some wistfulness for times gone by, albeit those times seem to appear better with the passing of the years. Syndicated columnist and humorist Dave Barry may have hit the nail on the head when he said: “In the old days, it was not called the Holiday Season; the Christians called it Christmas and went to church; the Jews called it Hanukkah and went to synagogue; the atheists went to parties and drank. People passing each other on the street would say "Merry Christmas!" or "Happy Hanukkah!" or (to the atheists) "Look out for the wall!"

But it was probably Helen Keller who in her succinct way summed up the meaning of the season best when she said : “The only blind person at Christmastime is he who has not Christmas in his heart.”

In many respects the past year has been a disappointment what with financial crises worldwide, the continued absence of peace in so many parts of the world, an incredible number of natural disasters and rampant political upheavals that do not yet seem to hold out the promise of positive change. Yet we humans have this uncanny ability to remain optimistic, to hope for a better future and to envision the light at the end of the tunnel even if it is not exactly visible to us.

Let us hope that as we go through this holiday season full of light and joy, that the new year about to burst forth in 12 days will be one of fulfilled dreams, good health and a peaceful universe in which we can finally experience the prophesy contained in the second book of Isaiah: “And they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not life up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.

2011-12-13T01:33:00.001-08:00

Misinformation, Disinformation and Lies

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Yesterday we entertained a couple of business guests from Amman, Jordan during their first ever visit to Israel. Oddly enough they came here with their dog that needed some special surgery which was not available in Jordan. Given that our staff had prior connections with the principals of the company one of our senior people offered to take them on a tour of Jerusalem and met them at Damascus Gate, one of the northern entrances to the Old City after which they took the traditional walking tour of the area.

This morning I was told that our guests were absolutely amazed that Arab residents of Jerusalem walk freely on the streets of the city without hindrance. Their impression, from the press in Jordan and other information sources, was that the Arab population of Israel is interned in quasi-concentration camps and their movement is severely limited by the local security forces. This brought home to all of us here in the office both the failure of our information efforts directed to the Arab world as well as the disinformation fed to the local populace there by the media.

As for misinformation, it’s worth looking at http://www.theblaze.com/stories/palestinian-hip-hop-group-comparing-israelis-to-nazis-performs-for-oregon-public-high-school-students/ which is a video of the Palestinian Hip-Hop Group DAM (which means “blood” in both Hebrew and Arabic) performing at Lincoln High School in Portland, Oregon on November 4th.

The lyrics demonize Israeli Jews, calling them rapists and Nazis, justifying terrorism against them. (”You’re a Democracy? It’s more like the Nazis…Your raping of the Arab soul gave birth to your child: The suicide bomber.”) A sample of the group’s work: one DAM song called “Min Irhabi” or “Who’s a Terrorist?” is filled with anti-Israel propaganda and in-your-face lyrics. With these few lines, one gets the picture:

Who’s a terrorist? I’m a terrorist?
How am I a terrorist while I live in my country
Who’s a terrorist? You’re a terrorist!
You’re swallowing me while I live in my country
Killing me like you killed my ancestors […]
Democracy? I swear you’re Nazis
With all the times you raped the Arab spirit
It got pregnant and birthed a boy called the suicide bomber
And here you are calling us terrorists

Even though students and parents voiced their concerns about the band’s content to the school board, the board went ahead with the performance, “despite the physical and emotional fears of the students.”

For the record, the public school’s Arab Studies Program is funded by the Qatar Foundation International, which also sponsored the hip hop group’s visit to the high school. Last year, Israeli, Spanish and British newspapers reported that the Qatar Foundation had given money to extremist Muslim cleric Yusuf al Qaradawi who advocates “terrorism, wife beating and anti-Semitism” and that the foundation gives money to the terrorist group Hamas. All of this taking place in the public school system of a major US city.

So now we have it all, misinformation, disinformation and lies, some accidental some intentional but all damaging to Israel and its reputation in the world community.

Price winning journalist Carl Bernstein once said, “The lowest form of popular culture - lack of information, misinformation, disinformation, and a contempt for the truth or the reality of most people's lives - has overrun real journalism. Today, ordinary Americans are being stuffed with garbage.” And that garbage molds public opinion and is our greatest enemy.

2011-12-07T08:39:00.001-08:00

Believing One’s Own Lies

By Sherwin Pomerantz

When I was still living in Chicago some 30 years ago, I used to meet with my accountant on a regular basis who was also an investor in the company. I learned a lot of things from him but one of the lessons that was seared into my memory was that the biggest danger business owners face is believing their own lies. That is certainly true but also applies to political leaders.

In an interview aired on ABC News today, the Syrian president says that acts of violence have been committed by individuals, not ordered by the government; "No government in the world kills its people, unless it's led by a crazy person" Assad says. Syrian President Bashar Assad went on to say that he is not directly responsible for acts of violence committed by his security forces since an uprising against the Alawite president began in Syria in March of this year, and denied reports of torture by the Syrian army.

Speaking with Barbara Walters, Assad said that "There is a difference between a deliberate policy of repression, and the presence of some errors committed by some officials. There is a great difference," Assad reportedly said, adding that acts of violence were carried out by "individuals," and not ordered by the Syrian government.

According to UN figures the death toll in the embattled country has risen above 4,000 people. Assad, speaking during his first interview with an American news outlet, dismissed that figure, questioning the UN's credibility.

Well, he is certainly guilty of the warning not to believe one’s own lies. His statement that only countries led by crazy people kill their own people may make a good sound bite but is hardly borne out by fact. There have been plenty of political leaders throughout history who were sane but either convinced they were above the law, had visions of world domination or, as in Assad’s case, deathly afraid of losing power and then used those reasons to slaughter even millions of people. So one does not have to be crazy to order one’s troops to fire at will.

Earlier this week Saudi Arabia convicted an Australian Muslim there for the Hajj pilgrimage of blaspheming the name of Allah and sentenced him to two years in jail and 500 lashes. 500 lashes, of course, cannot be sustained by any human being so that is effectively a death sentence and the court’s decision, on appeal, to reduce the time in prison to one year is laughable, given the fact that the prisoner will not survive the lashings. But no one considers the leadership of Saudi Arabia crazy, do they?

In addition, given the totalitarian regime which was created by Assad’s father and continued by him, can anyone anywhere give credence to his claim that the deaths were carried out by individuals and not by order of the government? In addition to accusations by human rights groups of torture, killings, and unwarranted arrests of activists and bloggers by the Syrian armed forces, recent reports point to a new phenomenon of unknown assailants and deaths on both the pro- and anti-Assad sides.

Sadly, the ability of political leaders to believe their own lies is not limited to regimes such as Syria. There are plenty of other examples worldwide even in the west. The job of the electorate and the judicial system, in countries that still claim to be free, is to prosecute those who act on such beliefs and convict and sentence them to appropriate prison terms.

There is no doubt that here in Israel we have something less than a perfect democratic system if there is such a thing. But the fact that this morning a former President of the country began serving a seven year prison term having been convicted of sexual crimes while in office is testament to the vitality of the judicial system in the country and an example of someone prosecuted for believing his own lies. Those who are guilty of such acts are also guilty of thinking they are above the law.

Theodore Roosevelt was right when he opined “No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask his permission when we ask him to obey it.” A point well taken and still true.

2011-11-28T14:00:00.001-08:00

Playing with Other People’s Money

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Some of you may have been following the newspaper articles regarding Israel’s decision to withhold tax monies collected on behalf of the Palestinian Authority.

For those who are not fully familiar with the issue, under the provisions of the Oslo Accords when the Palestinian Authority (PA) was established, it was agreed that Israel would continue to collect all taxes on behalf of people living in the territories under the control of the PA and then turn over those moneys to the PA each month. Currently, Israel is holding about 100 million dollars of said funds, essentially acting in a fiduciary role on behalf of the PA.

When the Palestinian Authority went to UNESCO to request membership in that organization and received it, Israel decided to withhold the payment of these funds as a punishment to the Authority for securing UNESCO membership. While I also decried both the application to UNESCO and UNESCO’s agreement to admit the Authority to membership, it always seemed to me that withholding these payments of monies that rightfully belongs to the Authority had no basis in law.

As November wound on, Israel’s Foreign Minister, Avigdor Lieberman went one step further and said that Israel should not convey these funds to the Authority because the Authority was using their treasury, part of which was composed of these funds, to do things like give bonuses to the prisoners released in the Schalit exchange and to build homes for those prisoners as well. Earlier this week Lieberman threatened to bring down the Israeli government if the funds were released although everyone agreed that, in principle, it was not in Israel’s best interests to hold these funds indefinitely.

All of this in the face of incontrovertible evidence that the withholding of these funds not only threatens to cause the Authority to collapse but also threatens the successful maintenance of the security apparatus that the Authority has established, much of it in cooperation with Israeli authorities.

Earlier today reports out of Jerusalem seem to indicate that the government’s line on releasing the funds is softening and, hopefully, this latest crisis will soon be resolved.

But the core issue remains and that is the role of a custodian of funds arbitrarily deciding under what conditions those funds can be released, even though the conditions of release are clearly spelled out in the protocols governing the relationship between the parties. There are, of course, those who will argue that the Authority violated the very same principles when it went to the UN for direct recognition or when it applied for membership in UNESCO. But the basic fact remains that the funds are not Israel’s to keep or use and that our country is simply acting as a conduit for the collection and remitting of those funds. End of story!

What bothers many of us living here is that one cannot simply decide to abrogate a commitment as punishment for the other side seemingly acting against those same agreements. Israel has plenty of ways to put pressure on the Authority in retaliation for the Authority’s defiance of principles to which they have agreed. But withholding the payment of funds that do not rightly belong to us is not one of them. Hopefully saner voices will prevail so that we can continue retain the moral high ground.

2011-11-25T00:45:00.001-08:00

At Least Put it on the Agenda

By Ben Dansker

In the 1970’s as a movement of Jewish renewal of sorts took place among young people, it seemed to me then that while few acted upon, the idea of Aliya, of coming to Israel to live, was at least on the agenda. I was a University student during many of those years and after that a young adult embarking on a career and it seemed that most of my Jewish peers, especially those who were to some degree committed to living a Jewish life, with varying levels of Jewish observance, talked about Aliya and many considered it an option. Not all for sure, there were those who chose careers that they felt iwould be impossible to pursue in Israel and others for whom Israel simply did not attract them. But it was part of the conversation of many.

Most of us had spent time in Israel, studying, volunteering, sometimes both and had been captivated by the drama unfolding there and by the experience of being part of a Jewish nation returning to and rebuilding its home. All of us were very well aware of the many difficulties inherent in living in Israel, the distance from family, adjustment to a new culture and language, the security threats, service in the army and most overwhelming per haps in those days, the great financial hardship that living in Israel seemed to be. And very few from those times, even those who seemed the most committed actually made it. My own Aliya took 10 years from my first visit and now 26 years later, I acknowledge that it was not always easy, but it was certainly possible, and certainly the right thing to.

I have no expectation that most western Jews will come to live in Israel and am surprised each time some one comes. What saddens me however is how few seem to even talk about it, consider, think about it. I find it hard to accept the absence of the topic from conversation of even those who seem to have enjoyed, even loved the time they spent it Israel and to have careers that would transplant well. Especially those at a stage in life before school aged children and teenagers and aging sick parents complicate the situation. Yes, I know that there are over 50 thousand missiles pointed at Israel and I know there are some government policies that many of you do not agree with and a culture that is different from yours. I have those 50 thousand missiles pointing at me as well and I don’t always agree with government policy nor am I happy about all aspects of Israeli life (and neither would I be about American life).

We waited for this opportunity for 2000 years and European Jews in the 1920s and 30’s missed an opportunity to save themselves from tragedy. Our prayers for 2000 years have directed us to Zion and Jerusalem. So at least, think about it; talk about it; look into it. Consider it as an option in your lives. At least put in it on your agenda.

2011-11-17T05:40:00.001-08:00

Losing Our Way

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Picture this if you will.

During the time when US citizens were prohibited from traveling to Cuba, a member of the House of Representatives decides to disobey US law and travel to Cuba to speak at the annual observances there of the January 1 1959 overthrow of the Batista government and the rise to power of Fidel Castro and his Communist buddies.

At the celebratory event, the US Representative, present in Cuba illegally, rises to speak and says the following: “I can tell you that the United States is in the midst of passing a series of anti-democratic laws and will soon even pass a ‘Death to Cubans’ law. You should know that US Secretary of State Kissinger is a fascist and should go back to the country of his birth as he has no place in my homeland.”

What do you think would have happened to that legislator? Most likely when he returned to the US Congress he would have been censured and probably removed from his position based on his flagrant violation of US law and his slander of government officials.

Well, yesterday, at a memorial service in Ramallah marking the seventh anniversary of the death of Yasser Arafat, Ahmad Tibi, an elected member of the Knesset went to Ramallah to speak at the service. According to a report in today’s Jerusalem Post echoed by all of the other news outlets as well, here is what was recorded:

Israeli-Arab lawmaker Ahmad Tibi at a memorial for Yasser Arafat in Ramallah suggested that the Israeli government will soon "propose a 'death to Arabs' law." Tibi, speaking Wednesday before a massive crowd marking the seventh anniversary of the Palestinian leader's death, was referring to several bills offered by right-wing lawmakers targeting the left that critics have labeled as "anti-democratic." He also slammed Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, calling him "the fascist settler that recently came to my homeland," Ynet reported. A former adviser to Arafat, Tibi referred to the late PLO chief as "the father of our homeland."

Note that Ramallah is in Area A, which, according to the Oslo accords, is under full military and civil control of the Palestinian Authority. Israeli citizens, according to Israeli law, are forbidden to enter Area A and, of course, Tibi, as a member of the Knesset is, indeed, an Israeli citizen. So his being there at all was in violation of the law he is sworn to uphold.

Secondly, what is it called when a member of a country’s legislature enters an area forbidden to him by law and then speaks publicly in negative terms about the Foreign Minister of the country in whose parliament he serves? Is it treason? Does that meet the definition of betraying one’s country? Is it sedition? Is it conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of the state? Or is it just plain stupidity along with a desire to show that he is simply not bound by the laws of the parliament in which he serves?

One would think that at a minimum he would lose his seat in the Knesset and be stripped of his parliamentary immunity. But, of course, this is Israel. And just as another Arab member of the Knesset, Haneen Zoabi, who travelled on the Mavi Marmara in May 2010 to break the blockade of Gaza was not penalized for actively demonstrating against the policies of the government and was not chastened, neither will Tibi. He will come back to Jerusalem, retake his seat in the Knesset and although many people there will be angry with him, there will be no price to pay for such insolence. And once again the Zionist enterprise will be shown to be lacking in the courage to defend its own laws.

O tempora, o mores, shame on the times and its customs, as uttered by Cicero in the Senate of Rome in his second oration against Verres. The founders of the country must be turning over in their graves.

2011-11-15T07:34:00.001-08:00

Israel on the Slippery Slope Away from Democracy

By Sherwin Pomerantz

A number of events have occurred here recently that may well be representative of a serious threat to the rule of law and the democratic process which has been the hallmark of Israeli society for so many years. Permit me to share two of them with you.

Jewish Identity Bill

The Knesset has been asked to consider a “Jewish Identity” bill which, in essence, would subordinate democratic rule to the country’s role as a Jewish state. Among the provisions of the bill are a call for Jewish law to serve as an inspiration for new legislation, the elimination of Arabic as an official language of the state (the other two are Hebrew and English) while giving it “special status” and a requirement that the government actively pursue Jewish settlement of all areas while dropping any government obligation to build for other communities living here.

Israel’s 1.5 million Arab citizens who represent 20% of the population would then, for all practical purposes, be formally categorized as second class citizens given that their language would no longer be respected at the same level of Hebrew and English and that the government would no longer have an obligation to build in their communities. This is a very different situation from the meaning of the words in Israel’s Declaration of Independence which addresses the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel guaranteeing “full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions.”

Former Ambassador Moshe Arens, who is certainly no left winger, calls the language issue “a sign of disrespect” in an op-ed in this morning’s Ha’aretz. And of course he is correct.

Knesset Member Avi Dichter who introduced the legislation has now taken it off the table under pressure and has tabled a substitute bill but it is difficult to see how the new bill is any better than the one originally proposed, even though some of the language has been altered. But the fact that the initial bill could have even been given credence is of concern.

Freezing of PA Revenues

Two weeks ago, when the Palestinian Authority successfully applied for membership in UNESCO, Israel reacted by freezing the tax revenues which are collected by Israel on the Authority’s behalf, effectively making it impossible for the Authority to pay its workers their full salaries for October. The framework under which Israel collects tax revenues on behalf of the Authority was an outgrowth of the 1993 Oslo Accords where Israel agreed to assume a fiduciary responsibility on behalf of the Authority. In principle, therefore, Israel has no right at all under any circumstances to withhold those funds.

This is very different than the US withholding its contribution to UNESCO over the same issue. The US has a law which prohibits the Government from contribution to any UN body which recognizes a Palestinian state before such agreements are reached with Israel. So, in that case, the US had no alternative but to withhold its annual payment to UNESCO. In the case of Israel, which is acting as a transfer agent for the funds to the Palestinian Authority, there is simply no legal basis on which to withhold such transfers.

The effect of withholding these payments is to undercut the security operations of the Authority as well as make it virtually impossible for the services provided by the Authority to continue. It is difficult to see how this can be of any value to Israel.

Add to this, of course, the current battle going on between the offices of the Chief Rabbinate and the Orthodox Tzohar rabbis regarding circumventing the hassles that engaged couples need to go through in order to be permitted to marry here; the current dispute over how judges are appointed to the Supreme Court which has deteriorated into a squabble between political parties; or the attempt by the Prime Minister to close down TV’s Channel 10 by not allowing it to refinance its debt presumably just because he and his wife are upset at the way they are treated by that channel’s news desk and one wonders if democracy can survive?

We need to heed the words of John Adams, the 2nd President of the United States who said: “Democracy…while it lasts, is bloodier than either aristocracy or monarchy. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide.” The slide down that slope seems to get steeper every day and our job as citizens must be to prevent the probable by education and political activity. We dare not do any less.

2011-11-10T05:47:00.000-08:00

What to do About Iran? Nothing!

By Sherwin Pomerantz

The IAEA has finally issued its long awaited report on what is really going on with Iran’s nuclear development. The report substantiates the world’s fear that Iran’s intentions are certainly not purely peaceful, that the country has been moving intentionally toward the development of nuclear weapons and in addition, they are working on being able to deliver a nuclear weapon at the tip of an intercontinental ballistic missile.

Is anyone surprised by the report? Israel has been saying exactly this for some time and now the international agency responsible for making such calls has verified this to be the case. Of course, the Iranians along with some of their Russian and Chinese friends claim that the report is biased and full of inaccuracies but that is also to be expected.

So what is the world to do now? Four days ago I wrote that I believe it would be national suicide for Israel to launch a military strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities. I posited that the casualties here as a result of a counter attack would be more than we could handle and survive. One of my readers who disagreed said that while it is true we could not survive a nuclear attack, it would be better to wipe out their capability and take the risk of a conventional weapon retaliation which would only cause 20,000-50,000 casualties here. Only?

But it also seems clear that the West will not take military action either. The logic goes that it would not be possible to knock out all of the nuclear capabilities in Iran and such an attack would certainly trigger a regional war and possibly even a world war.

That leaves the West with the option of enacting “crippling sanctions”. But that action would probably plunge the world into an economic malaise that would be difficult to recover from. If such sanctions were to be put in place, Iran would no doubt do whatever it could to block the Straits of Hormuz through which 40% of the world’s oil supplies must pass every day. Fuel prices would skyrocket out of control and the world’s economy would be thrown into chaos, as if we don’t already have enough problems. And, of course, the Russians have made it evident that they will use their Security Council veto to block such sanctions at the UN.

Frankly, no pun intended, but the Iranians have the world over a barrel and there are very few choices available to deal with the problem. That being the case, what is the best strategy? In my opinion it is to do nothing.

The first thing we need to realize is that we will not stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Conceivably their timetable can be lengthened but Israel by itself cannot stop them and it is becoming clearer every day that the rest of the world will not do so either. We may have had an opportunity to do something about this three years ago, but that is now history.

The second thing we need to admit is that Israel may be an expendable entity in the minds of the West if the leadership in the West gets to the point where they believe that the elimination of Israel from this part of the world will satisfy the radical Islamists. We all know that even eliminating Israel will not answer the demands of radical Islamists, any more than permitting Hitler to take over the Sudetenland mollified his insane desire for world domination. We dare not put ourselves in the position of becoming the pawn used by the West to satisfy the Iranian desire for regional hegemony.

So the only option that may be left to us and the West is simply to do nothing while stopping all reporting about Iran in the world press. That is, act as if Iran simply does not exist. Stop reporting Ahmadinejad’s rants, stop reporting on Iran’s threats against the world, and stop talking about Iran’s nuclear threat. After all, there are other countries such as Pakistan and North Korea who have nuclear weapons, which are somewhat unstable but about whom we hear very little said. So it should be with Iran as well.

Of course, our defenses against the launch of any weapons from Iran against Israel or any other country should be beefed up to the point where we have some level of advance warning and protection. The West should also have ships continuously patrolling the waters outside the territorial limits of Iran to monitor activities there. But don’t give this maniac any publicity and be ready to deal with him head on should he make good on any of his claims.

These options are open to us and if the more “moderate” Arab states like Saudi Arabia and the UAE are bothered by a nuclear Iran, then let them deal with it as they see fit. Sometimes isolationism is a good thing and when one is dealing with someone whose logic is totally motivated by some kind of religious zeal, lock him in the closet and throw away the key. We simply may have no other choice.

2011-11-06T02:44:00.001-08:00

The Lunacy of Attacking Iran

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Over the past ten days there has been a non-stop dialogue going on in the press about Israel’s consideration of plans to bomb the nuclear facilities of Iran.

Everyone knows the logic. Iran having a nuclear bomb capability would be a threat to the entire region, and given its President’s stated desire to see Israel wiped off the map, should they develop such a weapon we here will be the first recipient of its use.

No doubt, of course, that it would be a bad thing for the entire world if Iran were to successfully develop a nuclear weapon. We are not dealing here with the classic cold war case of the US and the Soviet Union where both parties knew well that neither ever wanted to use that capability, even though both possessed it. There was logic at play among two sworn enemies that prevented the Cuban missile crisis, for example, from escalating into nuclear war. In the case of Iran, whose diplomacy is driven somewhat by the religious fanaticism of Islamic fundamentalism, one cannot assume that diplomatic logic will hold sway.

Israel, of course, has the military capability of exercising a first strike on much of Iran’s nuclear production facilities and, according to informed sources here, that would delay (not eliminate) Iran’s development by four years. But would the risk be worth it? I think not. Iran would immediately respond to any attack with whatever firepower they had and, most likely, Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza would join the fray. By some estimates there are upwards of 100,000 missiles aimed at Israel from these two locations as I write this.

But even if those numbers are exaggerated, the casualty count in Israel as a result of the response to such an attack will, I fear, be much more than our emergency services could handle and the country could very well slip into chaos. Do we really want to unleash such forces against us for a possible delay of four years in Iran’s nuclear development? Does that make any sense at all?

Perhaps the fear of an Iranian attack on Israel even if they have nuclear weapons is unrealistic in the first place. The Iranian leadership may be fervently religious but no one credits them for being either stupid or unrealistic. They know that an attack by Iran against Israel will unleash both Israel’s formidable military response as well as a response from the US which is pledged to defend Israel in the case of such an attack. Logic would dictate that even in the face of Islamist fundamentalism, the leadership of Iran will not choose to launch such an attack given the obvious and predictable circumstances that will follow.

This reasoning would lead any sane Israeli leader to the conclusion that an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities is not in the best interests of the future of Israel. Further, that the best defense against Iran is to make sure that our military machine has the capability to strike back, and strike back hard should they attack us. In the humble opinion of this writer any other strategy at this point in time would be nothing less than lunacy on the part of our government. The saber rattling should stop, and stop quickly as contemplating the fallout from such an attack on our part could potentially mean the end of the enterprise called Israel as we know it.

2011-11-02T07:20:00.001-07:00

The UNESCO Vote…What it Really Means

By Sherwin Pomerantz

This week’s vote by UNESCO, the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization to admit Palestine into full membership is clearly in violation of its own constitution.

Art II.2 of the UNESCO Constitution states: “Subject to the conditions of the Agreement between this Organization and the United Nations Organization, approved pursuant to Article X of this Constitution, states not members of the United Nations Organization may be admitted to membership of the Organization, upon recommendation of the Executive Board, by a two-thirds majority vote of the General Conference.

As a non-member of the United Nations, the Palestinian Authority which aims to create a future state called Palestine is, today, not a state at all. It is perhaps true that there are those who can make a cogent argument that it has many of the trappings of a state and has successfully built a number of institutions required for statehood, but it is definitely not a state under the commonly accepted definition which the UN itself uses.

To qualify as a subject under the traditional definition of international law, a state has to be sovereign: It needs a defined territory, a population, a government, and the ability to engage in diplomatic or foreign relations. Clearly the land now overseen by the Palestinian Authority is not sovereign, its territorial borders are not accepted by international bodies and it is certainly not solvent. The permanent cut off of donor funds would bankrupt the authority in 30 days.

Yet 107 countries voted in favor of the proposal to admit Palestine, 14 voted against and 52 countries abstained. All of this on the heels of the recent interview by Egypt’s Dream2TV on October 23rd where Palestinian Authority Chairman Abbas said: “I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I will never recognize the Jewishness of the state (of Israel), or a Jewish State.” Commenting afterwards on the recent release of 1,027 convicts in order to bring Gilad Schalit back home he said: Hamas kidnapped, or rather captured, a solider, and managed to keep him for five years and that is a good thing. We don’t deny it. On the contrary, it’s a good thing that on a small strip of land, 40 x 7 kilometers, they were able to keep him and hide him.” Later in Ramallah at a celebration honoring the release of the convicts he added, “We need more Gilad Schalits so we can ultimately free all of our people held in Israeli jails.”

One wonders therefore, what kind of contribution this new group can make to UNESCO when its own educational approach is to vilify its neighbors at every turn and which continues to use textbooks in its schools which talk about Jews as dogs, vermin and other less than laudable terms.

The United States was right to cut off funding to UNESCO given a 1994 law on the books of the US Congress that barred funding “any affiliated organization of the United Nations which grants full membership as a state to any organization or group that does not have the internationally recognized attributes of statehood.”

There are those who believe, probably with good cause, that at the end of the day the Palestinian Arab leadership has no interest in ending the conflict with Israel. In spite of the evidence I still hold out hope because, as I said earlier this week, I do not believe that the current situation is sustainable. But concessions are not a one way street, and if the Palestinian Arab leadership persists in thumbing its nose at the fundamental principles of international diplomacy, it will get what it deserves and should not complain about it. The door to our Prime Minister’s office is open wide and Abbas should take advantage of it before it is sealed shut.

2011-10-31T03:41:00.000-07:00

Achieving Political Sustainability in Israel

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Sustainability has become the watchword of environmentalists worldwide but somehow or other the concept has not permeated the psyche of those involved in politics.

The dictionary defines sustainability as “using a resource so that the resource is not depleted or permanently damaged.” While this generally applies to conserving the natural resources of the planet to ensure our long term ability to survive, isn’t it also applicable to political situations? And wouldn’t the concept of sustainability also apply to Israel? Perhaps so.

The challenge in applying the concept of sustainability to a political situation is that different people look at the concept through very different lenses. For example, there are those who believe that Eretz Israel (i.e. the Land of Israel) as described in the Torah is the resource and, in order to support the concept of sustainability, we must do everything we can to preserve that resource. In theory that all sounds logical. However, much of that resource has already been lost to Jordan, Syria and Lebanon and even the most ardent supporters of this approach harbor no hope that those portions of the land will ever be returned to us. Today, those who see sustainability through these lenses are committed to retaining Judea and Samaria (i.e. the West Bank) and to recapturing Gaza as well in order to be minimally loyal to the concept of Eretz Israel.

Then there are others who look at sustainability as the challenge before us to maintain what we already have and ensure our long term survival in that space. For those who subscribe to this approach sustainability means retaining all of the land within the oft referenced 1967 borders as well as the large settlement blocs (i.e. Gush Etzion, Ma’ale Adumim, Ariel, etc.) in Judea and Samaria, while acknowledging the Palestinian Arab claim to their roots here and their right to the establishment of an independent state of Palestine on the remaining areas not included in this formulation.

Finally, there is that third group of Israelis who have internalized sustainability to the point where they believe that complete separation from the Palestinian Arab population in Judea and Samaria is the only practical path to sustainability. This group is prepared to close down the settlement enterprise completely, draw a clear border between Israel and the future state of Palestine and then find some way to function in a geographically reduced Israel.

Of course, at some point in time theory must give way to practice. To quote that great American philosopher (and former New York Yankee catcher and manager) Yogi Berra, “In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.” So the job of the government then is to understand the multiple theories that are shared by different segments of the population here and see “sustainability” as doing what is best to ensure that our children and grandchildren will still be able to live in an Israel that is both Jewish and democratic without the constant threat of war and terror. None of the three theories of political sustainability described above are solutions in and of themselves. But if three circles are drawn, each representing one of those theories, it will soon become obvious that where those three circles intersect and overlap lie the elements of a theory that can be acceptable to all.

Is that just a theory as well? I think not. Is there something that can be done to put the theory into practice and actually make it happen? I think so.

The first challenge of our government is to shut up. There is altogether too much “noise” in our system which, in the long run, tends to do us more harm than good. Minister of Foreign Affairs Avigdor Lieberman is a case in point. His verbal assaults on Palestinian Authority Chairman Abbas last week brought no positive value whatsoever to the attempt to find a way to bring the parties back to the negotiating table. While I know that a lot of people like to say that Lieberman says out loud what many of us think, that does not make his diatribes acceptable. When he agreed to accept the position as Foreign Minister, he also agreed, prima facie, to act like a diplomat and not like a bull in a china shop. The fact that the Prime Minister did not disassociate himself from those comments is even less understandable.

The second challenge of the government is to find a creative formula that makes it impossible for the other side to refuse to meet. Last week I suggested a 90-day construction freeze in the territories as a gesture to the Palestinian Arab leadership. That was a mistake on my part and a reader in Chicago suggested something much more sensible, a 90-day construction freeze to begin the day the parties sit down to negotiate. I actually thought that was brilliant on the part of my friend there.

The third challenge for the government is to understand and internalize that sustainability means dealing in realistic expectations and making sure that the messages that come out of government circles, all government agencies, reflect reality and not the wishful thinking of people who are not willing to look at facts and deal with them honestly.

French philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (1881-1955) said “The future belongs to those who give the next generation reason for hope.” That is the true definition of sustainability in politics and both sides here need to internalize this in order for our grandchildren to live here in peace and security.

2011-10-27T00:51:00.000-07:00

One More Chance? Is it Worth the Risk?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Reading the papers here over the last few days does not help at all to clarify the next steps that Israel should or should not take regarding possible forward movement towards negotiations with the Palestinian Arab leadership.

Earlier this week Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman let loose a barrage of negative comments about Palestinian Authority Chairman Abbas saying that he should resign, that Abbas is the obstacle to peace and that the peace process itself would be well-served by his departing the scene.

In re sponse, Israel’s President, Shimon Peres, stated publicly the next day that Chairman Abbas and his Prime Minister, Salam Fayyad, are both serious leaders of the Palestinian Arab population, that they are, indeed, reliable peace partners and that we should negotiate with them.

Yuval Diskin, former director of the Shin Bet, Israel’s equivalent of the CIA, in a speech at Ashalim College in the Negev on Wednesday opined that while Abbas and the rest of the Palestinian Arab leadership does not love us, Abbas is squarely against terrorism, and has done more than any other Palestinian Arab leader to quell terrorism. He went on to say that Israel will make a mistake if it does not find a way to negotiate with Abbas as when he steps down (he is now 76 years old) there is no apparent heir and there will, no doubt, be an internal battle for the leadership of Fatah.

This morning, in response to new overtures by the Quartet dealing with re-energizing the peace process here (i.e. the US, Russia, the EU and the UN) Israel’s Prime Minister stated the country’s willingness to immediately sit down with the Palestinian Arab leadership to negotiate peace without preconditions while the representatives on the other side said they are prepared to come to the negotiating table only if Israel ceases all construction in the areas captures in 1967. (Recall that Israel did enforce such a 10-month suspension in 2010 and the Palestinian Arab leadership still did not agree to come to the table. They waited until the 10th month and then said they would sit down and talk if the freeze was extended.)

So what to make of all of this? Down deep the overwhelming majority of Israelis agree that the present situation is not sustainable over the long run. But that understanding starts to fracture when one digs deeper as to what to do next. Options range from acceding to all of the demands of the Palestinian Arab leadership before sitting down to negotiate, to declaring sovereignty over all of Judea and Samaria (i.e. the West Bank) and letting the chips fall where they may.

The question then would seem to be is it worth making one more concession to Palestinian Arab demands in order to see, once and for all, if we do actually have a partner on the other side? In spite of my earlier blog which I clearly titled “no more concessions” I would have to say that I think the process is worth one more shot. If I were making the decisions for the Government of Israel I would say to the Palestinian Arab leadership, ok, we will suspend all construction in the territories captured in 1967 for 90 days but no other pre-conditions to the talks. If the other side is prepared to then sit down and discuss the parameters of an end to the conflict, fine. If not, Israel will have to decide what is in its best interests and proceed on that path.

I am suggesting this for the same reason that I was in favor of the incredibly lopsided prisoner swap that took place last week where we exchanged 1,027 convicts for Gilad Schalit. I agreed with the assessment of the government here that no one can tell what will happen in Egypt over the course of the next 12-18 months. Therefore, as long as we had someone to speak with who was willing to act as an intermediary, we needed to take advantage of that situation.

I believe the same is true now with the Palestinian Arab leadership in Judea and Samaria. While all of us can point to plenty of negatives about their history, and certainly Yuval Diskin is correct when he says they will never love us, the fact is that there is significant security and economic progress being made in the areas under their control and we need to recognize that. Security cooperation between us is the best it has been in years but no one can tell what will be in the future.

So, recognizing all of the pitfalls in going this route, and understanding that we will cross yet another red line, we have taken so many chances for peace in the past that one more now will probably not make much of a difference. We may not succeed in this effort but we probably owe it to future generations to take one more stab at it. Maybe, just maybe, the other side also finally understands this as well.

2011-10-24T05:26:00.001-07:00

Can You Believe? The Topsy Turvy World Called the Middle East

By Sherwin Pomerantz

I thought I would let the smoke clear after last week’s release of everybody’s son, now Sgt. Major Gilad Schalit, and the agreement by Israel to release over 1,000 convicted terrorists in return before blogging again. Now that some days have passed it is interesting to watch what has happened here in the region in the aftermath of last week’s mixed feelings of joy and concern.

In Judea and Samaria (i.e. the West Bank), Palestinian Authority Chairman Abbas has announced a government payment of $5,000 to each released terrorist. Of course, the Authority has no funds to pay even its monthly obligations for salaries to government employees so these monies then will need to come from funds supplied each month by the United States and the European Union. Can you believe?

The dichotomy of this situation would be laughable if it were not so sad. On the one hand Abbas regularly states that the Authority is against encouraging terror, while simultaneously rewarding terror through the payment of these release bonuses, partially funded by western governments. At the same time, of course, in speeches since last week’s release Abbas has regularly urged more kidnappings of Israeli soldiers to be used as bargaining chips to force the freeing of the remaining (approximately) 5,000 Arab security prisoners and terrorists still in Israeli jails. Can you believe?

One of the remaining prisoners is Marwan Barghouti who is serving five life terms for his masterminding and involvement in multiple deadly terror attacks against Israelis. Yossi Beilin, one of the architects of the failed Oslo Accords of 1993 and the creator of the Geneva Initiative, is quoted as saying earlier this week: “Barghouti is a political leader, not a terrorist, even if he led others to use terror and was responsible for the second intifada.” In Beilin’s twisted logic being an accessory to a crime or aiding and abetting criminal activity does not make one a criminal. Somewhere during his PhD studies in Political Science at Tel Aviv University he must have been absent the day they spoke about the implications of being an accomplice to a crime. How else to explain this convoluted thinking from one of Israel’s best minds? Can you believe?

During this same period of time Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi was killed by rebel forces in his hometown of Sirte. Quickly thereafter Libya’s transitional leader, Mustafa Abdul-Jalil declared the end of the 8-month civil war and set out plans for the future with a strong Islamist tone. After declaring that Libya would be called an Islamic Nation (n.b. nobody seems to mind any nation, Libya, Iran, Iraq, being called Islamic as long as Israel is not called Jewish), he added that Islamic Sharia law would be the basic source of legislation and existing laws that contradict the teachings of Islam would be nullified. No surprises there.

In an insightful comment on the uprisings that have been going on in the Arab world over the past 10 months, Ambassador (Ret.) Yoram Ettinger writes: “Western observers tend to ignore the significance of the 1,400 year old monopoly of Islam over the religious, educational, social and political aspects of every Arab country. Such a repressive monopoly guarantees an Islamic victory in every democratic process. The 1979 freeing of Iran from the autocracy of the Shah produced the Khomeini Revolution, a radical, oppressive, megalomaniac Islamic regime. The 2002 election in Turkey yielded the less-radical Islamic regime of the Justice and Development Party, headed by Erdogan, who aspires to lead the Islamic World and reinstate the Ottoman Empire.”

He goes on to note: “Arab regimes dread freedom of religion, freedom of expression, freedom of speech, free competition, free press, free Internet and free minds. In 2006, Condoleezza Rice’s insistence upon introducing democracy to Gaza catapulted Hamas terrorists to power. In 1996, Jimmy Carter certified the electoral victory of Arafat, who proceeded to launch an unprecedented campaign of terrorism. In 1979, the eagerness to spread democracy led Western leaders to support the Khomeini Revolution. During 1917-1967, a sustained campaign, by the British empire, to introduce democracy to Arab lands failed decisively.” So why is the current situation so hard to believe?

Our job now must be to resist delusional reasoning that allows us to believe, albeit incorrectly, that things will change for the better in the near term. While the potential for positive movement is present throughout the region, the signs, so far, are less than encouraging.

Dr. Carl Sagan, American astronomer, astrophysicist, cosmologist and award winning author said before he died in 1996: “It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” And that, today, is our test and should be the yardstick by which we assess reality.

2011-10-19T06:26:00.001-07:00

Is Capital Punishment a Deterrent? And Should we Even Care?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

My blog of Tuesday elicited more responses than normal. Many people felt that history has shown that capital punishment is generally not a deterrent to crime so there is, therefore, no value in Israel’s using that in the future as it will not buy us anything. Should we really care whether that works as a deterrent or not? I’m not sure.

One of my readers thought that my blog was good but that, in a word, he says “I think you guys are screwed. Deterrence requires a value proposition where both sides threaten something of value on the other side. The gap between what your enemy threatens (based on this prisoner exchange) and what you threaten is so wide that you lose either way, and therefore you have no deterrence. You guys need to get outside the box and figure out how to threaten something of value that the Palestinian leaders, terrorists, and the world will understand. The Palestinians have and hold little of value, including people. You have just validated a cheap, easy, effective tactic for your enemy. I would have done the same thing as the return of another 1000 Palestinian heroes will not change the military equation. So, what do you threaten? What can you threaten that your friends will understand and support? Time is short.”

Another reader indicates that “The underlying factor will not go away - our enemy does not value life. A life lost for them at the hands of an enemy may be sad for the immediate family but they will be told and taught they were martyrs to a glorious cause. A person sitting in a prison is a martyr. An executed person is a martyr. A life lost for us, even in the line of duty, is a disaster.”

Someone else wrote “Executing captured perpetrators of terrorist acts will create a price tag. As an example, (our enemies will send) one suicide bomber for every executed terrorist. For us, each life lost is a disaster. This prisoner exchange only underlines how much we value life and how little they do. They understand this and that is why they held him (i.e. Schalit) so long. Until our enemy changes its ways, there will be no great enough deterrent.”

Another writes, “Though I feel sick that these people are being released, the thought of execution, though it may seem somewhat logical if not a gut reaction, leads me to the question Will we challenge our own moral fabric with the introduction of the death penalty?
Further, flattening 1 square kilometer around an area fired from by terrorists is collective punishment. Are we ready to say that a Gazan is an automatic terrorist? Is not our morality the back-bone that keeps this country alive in its fight against its enemies?”

Not to be outdone, of course, the New York Times in an editorial today congratulates Prime Minister Netanyahu for making the deal, for having “twisted himself in an ideological knot to get this deal.” And then, as only the Times can do, it makes the leap to the following conclusion:

“One has to ask: If Mr. Netanyahu can negotiate with Hamas — which shoots rockets at Israel, refuses to recognize Israel’s existence and, on Tuesday, vowed to take even more hostages — why won’t he negotiate seriously with the Palestinian Authority, which Israel relies on to help keep the peace in the West Bank?.... Why can’t he make a similarly impassioned appeal for a settlement freeze for the sake of Israel’s security?” Amazing is it not that there is no reference at all to the fact that Abbas and his cronies have refused to sit down with Israel, even after a 10 month settlement freeze, unless Israel pre-agrees to give up all of its bargaining chips before the dialogue begins?

But the facts are:

»Our enemies seem to place a very low value on the worth of a human life.
»Executing admitted killers who have been convicted in an Israeli court may not be a deterrent.
»Israel does not want to be in a position yet again to have to release convicted murderers in order to redeem our captives.
»We have a limited number of options open to us.
»Things will probably get worse before they get better.
»Our enemies have captured the narrative and made us into the bad guys.

So the options open to us are limited. Given that and considering the financial cost as well of feeding and housing convicted killers (i.e. about $ 40,000 per person per year according to local estimates) I would stand on my earlier position. That is if we apprehend perpetrators of terror attacks where Israeli citizens have died as a result, and if they admit to their crime and are found guilty in an Israeli court then such individuals are guilty of genocide (i.e. as defined, the intentional killing of a [large] group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation) then we have a right to inflict capital punishment on the guilty parties. Israel endorses capital punishment under such circumstances and we would do ourselves a service by letting one and all know that from a certain date, this will be our policy.

Critics may be right that this will not be a major deterrent, but it will be a clear statement to those who choose terror as their vehicle for protest, that we place the same value on their lives as they place on ours. No more, no less. It’s time we drew our own red lines and stood by them.

2011-10-17T04:50:00.000-07:00

After the Exchange: What Israel Should Do Now - The Real Price Tag

By Sherwin Pomerantz

If all goes according to plan tomorrow Gilad Schalit, who has been held by Hamas in Gaza for over five years, will return to Israel and the waiting arms of his parents. In return Israel will release 1,027 convicts and 81 Egyptians jailed here at which time Ilan Grapel, the Israeli-American Emory University law student held in Cairo since June will also be released.

This exchange has elicited very strong feelings on both sides of the political spectrum and questions remain as to whether it was the right thing to do, although I personally remain convinced that it, indeed, was the right thing to do. However, in order to minimize the chances of this type of thing occurring again, Israel must take specific actions in the future to dissuade terrorists from killing our citizens.

In a word, once the full exchange has taken place, our government should make it known to one and all that the penalty for terrorism that results in the death of our citizens, once the perpetrators are found guilty by Israeli courts, will be execution. The world community may think this is a harsh response but people who decide to blow up pizza parlors where normal citizens of Israel are enjoying lunch, must understand that the same punishment they have meted out to our citizens will be meted out to them as well. My guess is that if we do that once or twice when such situations occur, God forbid, again in the future, terrorists will think twice about engaging in such activities.

This was, of course, my big personal disappointment after the pullout from Gaza in 2005. It was my hope that our government would have said to one and all, that now that we are out of Gaza there is a clear international border between Israel and Gaza. Given that, should rockets start coming at us from Gaza, for each attack we will simply obliterate one square kilometer of land around the place from which the rockets were fired. I thought then, as I do now, that it was a strategic error on our part not to have done this. And, of course, not having done so, our citizens in the south of the country paid a huge price for our ineptitude.

Taking a position on future terrorist acts that once the accused person has been found guilty, he or she will be executed, will at least give some small measure of solace to those parents who have previously lost children in terrorist acts and who are now witness to those who are guilty being released back to Arab society. We owe them that much as we do those in the future who might also suffer such losses. And to the perpetrators of these crimes we, of course, owe nothing, except a fair trial before punishment.

The first and second time we carry out such executions we can be sure that the world press will spread those pictures across five columns on page one of the next day’s edition. Nevertheless, I am pretty confident that the risks of there being a third or fourth time will be reduced dramatically in the face of such swift and final justice. We do not ever want to have to witness what we will witness this week, the release of hundreds of unrepentant criminals back into society where they will be able, should they desire to do so, to continue their errant ways.

I remain happy that Israel did the moral thing and rescued one of our young men from the hands of the enemy. But we now must do everything possible to make sure we never have to do this again. That’s the price tag for such action and people who contemplate terror should understand what it will cost them personally. Anything less on our part will be an insult to the memory of those who gave their lives here only because they were Jews.

Martin Luther King Jr, whose memorial was dedicated on Sunday in Washington DC once said: “A nation or civilization that continues to produce soft-minded men, purchases its own spiritual death on the installment plan.” The message should be clear to one and all that we here in Israel pay cash!

2011-10-14T05:32:00.001-07:00

Redeeming the Captives II – The Price We Pay

By Sherwin Pomerantz

This morning’s papers have now clearly stated that Gilad Schalit will be returned to Israel on Tuesday of next week via a crossing from Hamas-controlled Gaza directly to Israel, and not via Egypt as originally announced. If all goes according to plan the Schalit family will enjoy a much deserved celebration at their northern home on Tuesday evening as we enter Hoshanna Raba, the day before we begin again the annual cycle of Torah readings. The timing could not be more appropriate as next Thursday in the Hebrew calendar is the annual day of renewal of our faith. For the Schalit family it will be a celebration of the rebirth of their family unit.

Over the last two days responses to my piece written on Wednesday in support of the government’s decision to release 1,000 prisoners (some people have asked me to correct that to “convicts”) has been mixed but is running 2:1 in favor of the position I took. However, the opposing viewpoint has merit as well and it is good to look at the logic of those who disagreed with me.

That logic goes something like this: (a) the future murders that will result from the release of these people from Israel’s jails are too predictable; (b) we feel for Gilad's family and friends, and understand that soldiers don't want their government to abandon them cavalierly, but in the end this was a political decision by the Netanyahu government and not a moral one; (c) one clear and dramatic result of the deal is how it strengthens Hamas (and Hizbollah and fellow travelers such the Muslim Brotherhood) at the expense of the PLO; (d) and once again Israel has damaged its deterrent capability and demonstrated that terrorism pays. Many have added a postscript that in this case the political right was correct in opposing the action of the government.

There is, of course, no argument whatsoever with this logic. It was/is too heavy a price to pay; yes the people who are released will probably return to terrorism; yes it definitely strengthens Hamas and that’s not a good thing; and, yes, terrorism and obstinacy has won out again. But having said all that, I am still willing to take the risk and hope that our military will be able to take care of these people in the right way should they return to their errant modes of operation, or should others be emboldened to follow their examples. The decision of the government to accept the inflated terms of Hamas (remember that two years ago the price was 450 released convicts, not 1,000) was a moral one and sometimes morality simply wins out, as it should.

Of course, I fully respect the alternative argument and, down deep, have no idea what’s right. I’m just happy that these parents, who have suffered so greatly for five years, will, hopefully, have a whole son returned to them next week and will understand the incredible debt that they owe to all of us for being willing to take this chance and stand by our captured soldiers. We can all be 100% sure that if the shoe were on the other foot, the response by our enemies would not have been so generous.

What everyone needs to understand, both here and abroad, is the simple truth that when it comes to our experiences here there simply is no right or wrong. Each situation needs to be examined on its own merits and then the tough choices have to be made. So I don’t think it is that the “right” was/is “right” but rather that each side has a valid argument and, in this case, an opportunity needed to be grasped before the price went up even further.

We all need to have a special place in our hearts for the anguish of those who have lost loved ones at the hands of these sub-human beings now being released from prison. There are no words of consolation we can offer them, nor is there anything we can do to bring their sons, daughters, spouses and parents back to life. But they, more than any others, can certainly sympathize with the anguish of the parents of Gilad Schalit and, in spite of their angst over the release of the murderers of their loved ones, must also experience just a small amount of joy at the return of one of our boys and the attendant morality of our leadership.

Winston Churchill had it right when he said “A man does what he must – in spite of personal consequences, in spite of obstacles and dangers and pressures – and that is the basis of all human morality.” So sometimes, morality wins over political expediency, as well it should.

2011-10-12T02:30:00.000-07:00

Redeeming the Captives – The Highest Jewish Value!

By Sherwin Pomerantz

The news in Israel today, as we are about to enter the week-long celebration of the holiday of Sukkot, is that Israel and Hamas have agreed on the terms required for Hamas to release the captured Israeli soldier Gilad Schalit after over five years of captivity. The price? Israel will release over 1,000 Palestinian Arab prisoners it now holds in its jails in two phases, half now and the other half after Schalit is brought to Egypt from where he will come back to Israel and the waiting arms of his parents. Many of the prisoners to be released have been convicted of multiple acts of terrorism leading to the deaths of hundreds of Israelis. The general understanding, based on prior releases of this type, is that when they return to their homes in Judea, Samaria and Gaza many will also return to their former terrorist activities.

Is the price worth it?

We have been through this before and there is always much debate relating to the redemption of captives or pidyon shvuyim as it is known in Hebrew. Historically, it has been a cardinal principle of Jewish life that, whenever possible, one is obligated to redeem captive Jews. The Talmud terms this a “mitzvah rabbah”, a “great” good deed which we are obligated to perform, adding that captivity is worse than starvation and death. Other strong support for this principle can be found in the writings of Maimonides and the Code of Jewish Law as well. There are authorities, of course, including former IDF (Israel Defense Forces) Rabbi Shlomo Goren who argued against such exchanges as he felt doing so, and thereby releasing terrorists back into society, would endanger the general public. However, a case can be made that IDF soldiers will be less effective in their tasks if they have no faith that, should they be captured, Israel will pay any price to bring them home. In that case there is actually a fear that our troops would prefer retreat to capture, ergo the significant concern.

Finally, there is the general opinion that our enemies will continue to attempt to kidnap our troops regardless of what we do, so the price of redemption is really not an issue and it does not, prima facie, increase terror. What might increase the incidence of kidnapping, of course, is the fact that by making this exchange we are permitting our enemies to claim that the process works. That is, capture an Israeli soldier and hold him/her long enough and Israel will meet the demands of the enemy.

But all of these arguments beg one question that none of the articles in the press have chosen to address, and that is the trauma parents face in such a situation. The loss of a child is such an incredibly devastating experience for a parent and so obviously personal as well, that no one who has not had to go through this can possibly understand what it does to the parents, to their psyches and even to their relationship. In Israel specifically, where we ask every parent to send their 18 year olds to the IDF to serve their country and where the attendant risk is real and palpable, parents (and the young men and women who serve) must believe that our country will do all it can to bring their children back in situations like the one in which Gilad Schalit found himself.

So today, once again, I am proud to be an Israeli and proud of my country, a country that cares so much about its sons and daughters that it understands its obligations to its citizens.

Aristotle is reputed to have said “We do not act rightly because we have virtue or excellence, but we rather have those because we have acted rightly.” And so we have! Am Yisrael Chai …The people of Israel live…and proudly!

2011-10-09T02:55:00.000-07:00

The Silly Jewish State Called Israel - NOT !

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Over the last months Israel, through its Prime Minister, has been demanding that before we are prepared to sit down and negotiate yet again with the Palestinian Arab leadership we want them to acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state. From our end we understand that this means one with democratic principles and full respect for all of its inhabitants regardless of their religion, as has been our custom. This certainly seems like a reasonable request and one that is significantly less problematic that their demand that before sitting down with us we agree to cease all construction in the areas captured during the six day war and agree to those armistice lines as the beginning of our negotiations.

The Palestinian Arab leadership has not agreed to this demand on our part and, of late, the reasons being given and being supported by other political leaders in the west are nothing short of illogical.

For example, Sari Nusseibah, a well-known Professor of Philosophy at Al-Quds University in Jerusalem, in an op-ed piece on Aljazeera.net entitled “Why Israel Can’t be a Jewish State” writes:

"Nevertheless, it remains true that, in the Old Testament, God commands the Jewish state in the land of Israel to come into being through warfare and violent dispossession of the original inhabitants. Moreover, this command has its roots in the very Covenant of God with Abraham (or rather "Abram" at that time) in the Bible and it thus forms one of the core tenets of Judaism as such, at least as we understand it. No one then can blame Palestinians and descendants of the ancient Canaanites, Jebusites and others who inhabited the land before the Ancient Israelites (as seen in the Bible itself) for a little trepidation as regards what recognizing Israel as a "Jewish State" means for them, particularly to certain Orthodox and Ultra-Orthodox Jews. No one then can blame Palestinians for asking if recognizing Israel as a "Jewish State" means recognizing the legitimacy of offensive warfare or violence against them by Israel to take what remains of Palestine from them."

Quite amazing is it not? First of all, that Nusseibah makes the claim that today’s Palestinians are the descendant of the ancient Canaanites, Jebusites and others who lived in Israel before the Children of Israel got here, trying to give credence to the fact that the Palestinian history in this land is older than ours. The positive side of this, of course, is the de facto recognition of our long history here which most Palestinian Arab leaders often try very hard to negate.

The final conclusion that if today’s Palestinian Arab leadership were to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, this would lead us to attack the non-Jewish population in the land and kill them is pure nonsense. Better Nusseibah and others should castigate Assad in Syria for killing, as of this weekend, over 2900 of his own people who are simply demanding their God-given rights to free speech and democratic representation. But that’s the fodder for another blog.

As if this is not enough to turn one’s stomach, the President of France, Nicolas Sarkozy, in an interview in the French magazine Le Canard Echaȋne, says “It is silly to talk about a Jewish state. It would be like saying that this table is Catholic.” He then added, “There are two million Arabs in Israel.” Yet this is the same Sarkozy who sees no problem with other nations with whom he has relations, such as Iran, whose official name is the “Islamic Republic of Iran” even though there are, today, about 25,000 Jews living in Iran (down from the 100,000-150,000 who lived there prior to 1948), 300,000-350,000 Bahai’s, and 300,000 Christians. Yet the official name of the country is the “Islamic Republic of Iran.” By the way Pakistan and Afghanistan also call themselves, officially, Islamic republics as well.

All of this reminds me of the remark Daniel Bernard made in 2001, who at the time was the French Ambassador to the United Kingdom. At a dinner party that year he said “All the current trouble in the world are because of that shitty little country Israel. Why should the world be in danger of World War III because of those people?”

I do not think that the concept of a Jewish state is a silly one. The idea of a Jewish Commonwealth dates back to biblical times and was certainly the understanding of the founders of Israel as recorded thusly in our Declaration of Independence:

Accordingly we, members of the People’s Council, representative of the Jewish community of Eretz-Israel and of the Zionist movement, are here assembled on the day of the termination of the British mandate over Eretz-Israel and, by virtue of our natural and historic right and on the strength of the resolution of the United Nations General Assembly hereby declare the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz-Israel to be known as the State of Israel.

The world must understand that those of us who have chosen to live here have done so because we believe that Israel is a Jewish country even if many of us also understand that to do so successfully we need to find a way to accommodate the needs of others who may not feel the same way. We need to be committed to do all in our power to make that a reality, but others who have trouble with the concept need to see it as their problem not ours.

2011-10-06T03:11:00.000-07:00

Israel Is Its Own Worst Enemy? - NOT !

By Sherwin Pomerantz

30 years ago today, October 6th, Anwar Sadat, then the President of Egypt, was assassinated in Cairo by terrorists who were against the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel which was signed two years earlier on the White House lawn in Washington. The treaty followed his breakthrough trip to Jerusalem 16 months earlier in 1977 when he shocked Israel and the world by announcing his readiness to travel to Israel and find a way to make peace with the Jewish state.

I was still living in the US at the time and clearly remember the excitement that was generated in Jewish communities worldwide regarding this breakthrough in the way an Arab leader was prepared to look at Israel. He was invited to speak in the Knesset and laid out a plan for peace that resulted in the first ever peace agreement between Israel and an Arab country (for the full text of the speech see http://www.ibiblio.org/sullivan/docs/Knesset-speech.html). The agreement was based on agreed upon issues of mutual security as well as an Israeli withdrawal from Egyptian lands (i.e. primarily the Sinai) captured during the Six Day War. Sadly he later paid a high price for having taken this initiative but for those of us living here, the border between our countries has been peaceful for the last 30 years.

This all came to me as I was reading today’s op-ed by New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, entitled “Is Israel Its Own Worst Enemy?” In it he makes a number of bold statements that demonstrate both his own misunderstanding of the situation here and the slanted information that gets out through the world press. He says: “Nothing is more corrosive than Israel’s growth of settlements because they erode hope of a peace agreement in the future.” And of course today everything over the green line is classified as a settlement even if it is a large contiguous neighborhood of Jerusalem, such as Gilo, Ramot or Ramat Shlomo.

But why is this so commonly accepted as fact? And when did the definition of a settlement become every community over the green line? And why can’s Jews continue to live in those communities after a Palestiniain state is created? Why does Abbas’ wish that the new state be Judenrein be taken as an accepted fact? Doesn’t that bother anyone?

As you may recall when former Prime Minister Sharon and former US President Bush met in Washington in 2004 and Bush issued his famous follow up letter to Sharon, he specified that “already existing major Israeli population centers” will remain within Israel, even if they are over the green line. And there was no outcry! The understanding was that this meant Gush Etzion, Ariel, and Ma’ale Adumim for example; in other words areas relatively deep inside Judea and Samaria (i.e. the West Bank). Ramot and Gilo in Jerusalem were never even on the table.

What happened of course is that President Obama moved the goal posts by saying last year that settlement construction anywhere over the green line must stop. Israel never agreed in the past to stop such construction, especially when it was related to the natural growth of these communities and the Palestinian Arab leadership never refused to negotiate even though construction was in progress. But when the goal posts were moved Israel was forced into a 10 month construction freeze which, as expected, did not bring the Palestinians back to the negotiating table. So I cannot agree with Kristof’s other statement that “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is isolating his country, and, to be blunt, his hard line on settlements seems like a national suicide policy.” Simply not true in light of the real facts.

Kristof continues by castigating the present administration here for its clumsy handling of relations with Turkey as if the deteriorating relationship is strictly Israel’s fault. He says “Mr. Netanyahu has also undermined Israeli security by burning bridges with Israel’s most important friend in the region, Turkey.” He, of course, conveniently makes no reference to the possibility that this relationship began to unravel long before May 2010 and seems to be a reflection of Erdogan’s long term plan to be the political leader of the Muslim world. Of course, for him to achieve that goal, bashing Israel at every opportunity and threatening war are simply the tools he needs to use to curry favor with other political forces in most Muslim countries. To assist him in achieving that goal Israel simply has to exist.

In retrospect, Sadat was right when he referred to the virtual wall that separated us from the Egyptians during his Knesset speech in 1997. In his words, “This wall constitutes a psychological barrier between us, a barrier of suspicion, a barrier of rejection, a barrier of fear or deception, a barrier of hallucination without any action, deed or decision. A barrier of distorted and eroded interpretation of every event and statement. It is this psychological barrier that I described in official statements as constituting 70 percent of the whole problem.”

His words then continue to be true today and, sadly, today there is no Sadat in the Arab World and, equally sad, no Menachem Begin (who welcomed Sadat to Jerusalem) in Israel. We here in Israel are not our own worst enemy although there is no doubt that we could certainly be getting our points across to the world in a more beneficial manner than we have done until now.

2011-10-02T05:47:00.001-07:00

-9 Days Since Friday – No More Concessions!

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With three days this past weekend to think about the coming year I’ve had a significant amount of time to mull over the past months during the countdown to the UN, the speech that Mahmoud Abbas gave at the UN, the world’s reactions, Netanyahu’s speech and the aftermath of that strange week. My conclusion after all of this cogitating is that the watchword of Israel from this point forward should be “No More Concessions” when it comes to getting the Palestinian Arab leadership to the peace talks. There is simply no logical reason at all why we here in Israel should have to do anything more than we have already done to encourage the other side to sit down and talk peace.

Why do I say this? Well, to me the answers are obvious.

First of all, we have made all kinds of concessions already and it has gotten us nowhere. As Michael Oren, Israel’s Ambassador to the UN wrote in the Washington Post last week, “Two Israeli peace proposals, in 2000 and 2008 met virtually all of the Palestinian’s’ demands for a sovereign state in the areas won by Israel in the 1967 war – in the West bank, Gaza and even East Jerusalem. But Palestinian President Yasser Arafat rejected the first offer and Abbas ignored the second, for the very same reason their predecessors spurned the 1947 Partition Plan.” Each time, accepting a Palestinian State meant accepting the Jewish State, a concession that they were unwilling to make, so why should we make any more concessions?

Charles Krauthammer in a September 29th op-ed in the New York Times wrote “Israel gave up land without peace in south Lebanon in 2000, and in return, received war (the Lebanon war of 2006) and 50,000 Hezbollah missiles now targeted on the Israeli homeland. In 2005, Israel gave up land without peace in Gaza, and again was rewarded with war – and constant rocket attack from an openly genocidal Palestinian mini-state.” So, why should we make any more concessions?

In 2010 Israel agreed to a settlement freeze for 10 months, to which the Palestinian Arab leadership responded by boycotting the talks for 9 months, showing up during the last days of the freeze and then walking out again when Israel would not guarantee, in advance, the claim to any territory beyond the 1967 lines. This, in violation of every prior agreement which stipulated that such demands are to be the subject of negotiations, not their precondition. So why make any more concessions?

Add to all of this the consistent mantra of the Palestinian Arab leadership questioning our historic claim to the land. Dennis Prager relates an interview he conducted earlier last month with Ghassan Khatib, Director of Government Media for the Palestinian Authority and the spokesman for Abbas. Prager asked him “Do the Palestinians recognize Israel as the Jewish state?” His answer was “no!” He went on to say that there is no Jewish people, so how can there be a Jewish country? The Palestinian position seems to be that there is a religion called Judaism, but no such thing as a Jewish people. This concept was further supported by Abbas’ UN speech where he said “I come before you today from the Holy Land, the land of Palestine, the land of divine messages, ascension of the Prophet Muhammad and the birthplace of Jesus Christ.” No intelligent being can think that this formulation which omitted any reference to the Jewish claim to the Land of Israel was accidental.

Personally, I still believe that for the long term success of the enterprise called Israel, we need to find a way to make permanent peace with our neighbors. But no one in their right mind enters a negotiation having shown all their cards up front, or having made compromises before the negotiations begin. Prime Minister Netanyahu has offered to go to Ramallah to meet with Abbas, has invited Abbas to come to Jerusalem and has even agreed to meet in a neutral location like Brussels. But the other side continues to set preconditions to any meeting and, every few months, seems to add yet another precondition. Given those circumstances we may as well stand our ground and say enough! The world will not like us any better if we make more concessions and it certainly seems as if the world cannot like us any less.

So, at this point, the best strategy would seem to be the one that our government is following, in effect saying, as former US Secretary of State James Baker said to then Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, “Call us when you are serious about peace. Here is our number.” Netanyahu should send the same message to Abbas and then wait for the call. My guess is that he will have a long wait.

2011-09-28T06:43:00.001-07:00

-5 Days Since Friday – Is Gilo East Jerusalem?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

All of us living here in Israel are just a couple of hours away from the start of the Jewish New Year, 5772, which begins at sundown. As the country winds down, the stores close, the streets get quiet and 95% of the Jewish population here, secular and religious alike, gather for their holiday dinners, another bombshell has fallen from Egypt and our Palestinian neighbors.

Yesterday the Israeli Cabinet approved the construction of an additional 1,100 apartment units in Gilo, a southern suburb of Jerusalem but well within the city limits demarcated by us after the Six Day War in 1967. According to most demographers, there are 40,000 people living in Gilo today. Many of the readers of this blog may recall that during the second Palestinian Arab uprising a few years ago, Gilo was attacked daily by live fire from Bethlehem, just across the valley to the west. Gilo itself is close enough to where I live (roughly in the center of the city) that at night we could hear the shelling going on from our bedroom window. A little scary to be sure.

Gilo like its northern counterpart Ramot, does, indeed, lie over the green line, as it were, but both areas were part of the city annexed by Israel in 1967. Both communities have grown dramatically as the population of city has increased. It is also important to note that Gilo, contrary to what is appearing in the papers today, is not in East Jerusalem but is south of the city in an area that was virtually uninhabited 44 years ago.

So, imagine the surprise today when in headlines in the local papers we find that Egypt is protesting the new construction and its Foreign Minister calls it an act of “Israeli Defiance to the International Community.” Remember, this is not a settlement, but a large neighborhood in Jerusalem proper.

It was not a surprise that the Palestinian Arabs objected earlier in the week, as their leadership objects to every new unit built anywhere they deem inappropriate even though all of this construction is a boon to their population as it provides work for thousands of Palestinian construction workers. As a matter of fact an attempt two years ago by the Palestinian Arab leadership to make working on these projects a crime met with incredible local resistance. As they found out, no one likes to have their government stick its hands in people’s pockets uninvited.

What is even more appalling is the article about this in Ha’aretz today, see

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/egypt-slams-israel-over-new-construction-in-east-jerusalem-1.387212

where Israeli columnists also call Gilo “East Jerusalem,” for which, as mentioned above, there is absolutely no basis in fact.

So, even though the events of last week at the UN are over, the battle that we face here daily is not at all over. Earlier in the week the US State Department also issued a criticism of this decision on our part, once again showing their lack of understanding of the basic geography here.

Our friends around the world need to raise their voices about this type of irresponsible political theatre so that the big lie does not continue unchallenged. Every time one of these lies is repeated it adds yet another nail in the coffin of the enterprise called Israel. Informed individuals need to object at every turn to this type of chicanery.

As we enter the new year, I extend my best wishes to my Jewish readers for a happy, healthy, prosperous and, dare I say as well, peaceful new year. Shana Tovah Umetukah! A Good and Sweet Year!

2011-09-26T10:54:00.001-07:00

-3 Days Since Friday – And Now the Turks are Churning

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Now that Netanyahu and Abbas are back in their respective home cities, it’s worth taking a look at one of our less pleasant neighbors at the moment, Turkey.

In today’s Zaman, the main Turkish daily published in Istanbul, the paper listed 174 names, apparently acquired through Facebook, of the 10 Israel Defense Forces soldiers who boarded the Mavi Marmara in May 2010 as it was trying to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza. The names were gathered by IHH, the organization that organized the flotilla.

Ramazan Ariturk, a lawyer for IHH, the Humanitarian Relief Foundation based in Turkey was quoted as saying “We have presented a list of Israeli soldiers who gave the order for and who were involved in the attack on the Turkish flotilla to the Istanbul prosecutor’s office. Currently we are waiting for the prosecutor’s office to issue an order for (their) arrest.

The move came as the Istanbul Chief Prosecutor’s Office appealed to the Turkish Intelligence Organization (MİT) in order to obtain information on the identities of the IDF soldiers involved in the raid which left nine Turks dead last year. According to Zaman, an affirmative answer from MİT would allow the prosecutor to open court cases against Israeli officials including the President, Prime Minister and former IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Asheknazi as well as the soldiers involved in the raid.

The charges would include “willful murder and torture” and “limiting freedom” of the passengers, the paper reported.

This is, of course, the same country that has, as part of its history, a significant record of atrocities which neither admits to nor been tried for.

These include:

• The Batak Massacre of 1876 when the Turks slaughtered thousands of Bulgarians simply because of their ethnic background.
• Dersim, where between 7,000-90,000 were killed, although no one can be sure as many of the bodies were destroyed beyond recognition.
• The Armenian genocide where 1,500,000 million were killed in 1915
• The Christian Genocide of 1912-1924
• Turkish atrocities in Cyprus in 1974
• The killing of 40,000 Kurds from 1984-2002 by the Turks.
• War crimes against Greeks during the War of Independence which involved the systematic torture, massacre and ethnic cleansing of several million Hellenes (Greeks) perpetrated by the Turks in Asia Minor, Constantinople (now called Istanbul by the Turks), Eastern Thrace, Imvros, Tenedos, Macedonia, Cappadocia and Pontos. Most of the victims were massacred between 1895 and 1955. The present estimate is that some 2,000,000 Greek children, men and women of all ages were killed during that period.

So this “moral” society which is now offended at the death of 9 of their citizens who were trying to break a legal blockade of Gaza by Israel (the recently issued Palmer Report of the UN stands by Israel’s claim that the blockade is lawful) bears no responsibility at all for the massacre of millions of people in the country’s earlier attempts at ethnic cleansing.

Article 301 of the Turkish penal code even makes it a crime to refer to the Armenian Genocide as genocide. So much for morals.

It is a given that when bad people murder a whole population, good people must respond. When time passes and we look back on people who murdered a whole population, we must never allow that transcendent evil to be denied or downplayed because of diplomatic or political considerations. It is simply wrong and immoral to do so. But it is even more offensive when the society involved in such activities then points the finger at others for grievances much less serious and which occurred because of baiting by people who claim to be on a humanitarian mission but whose goals are transparently belligerent.

The famed lawyer Louis Nizer once said “When man points a finger at someone else, he should remember that four of his fingers are pointing at himself.” The Turks need to internalize that concept.

2011-09-25T10:55:00.001-07:00

Postscript to the UN

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Well, for those of you who thought you would not hear from me again, I am not finished yet. Friday, September 23rd has come and gone, Palestinian Authority Chairman Abbas spoke to the UN General Assembly as did Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and now the “fun” begins.

The Prime Minister gave the speech many of us expected he would give. He told “our” truth to an audience that could, at best, be described as somewhat respectful, at least those people who remained in the room. Of course, the Iranians were absent as were the Syrians and the Palestinians left one sole representative at their station who seemed very busy taking notes. As for the speech itself, some people feel that Netanyahu could have strengthened his remarks regarding the government being in favor of two states for two peoples living side by side in peace and security but, other than that, it was what we needed to tell the world. Our claim to this land is 4,000 years old and anyone denying that claim in any way, shape or form is simply lying for the sake of politics.

As for the Israeli delegation, from my viewpoint seeing a replay of the speech on Saturday night here in Israel, I found the delegation an embarrassment. Foreign Minister Lieberman sat slouching in his chair and the one time during the speech that he felt he had to applaud he put his hands together limply and clapped them once. As far as I am concerned, and many people here agree with me, the best thing the Prime Minister can do for Israel is to sack his Foreign Minister as he is persona non grata in many world capitals and a major embarrassment to the country as well.

Sadly, Lieberman’s right hand man, Deputy Minister Ayalon, who sat next to him with the same sad look on his face, knows the diplomatic business well, having done an excellent job as a former Ambassador to the United States. How he ever got into bed with Lieberman is a mystery to most of us and the hope is that if he were not involved in that manner, he would raise himself up to his former level of competence.

As for Chairman Abbas, while he appeared the picture of diplomacy his remarks contained all of the old lies that have been bandied about for years and he was much more volatile and accusatory than anyone here expected. One of his most disappointing statements was his reference to the Muslim and Christian historical claims to this land, conveniently omitting any acknowledgement of Jewish history here. Akiva Eldar of Ha’aretz in this morning’s editorial praised the speech and said that the only mistake Abbas made was his “inadvertent” omission of the Jewish claim to this land. Can the left be so blind as to think that the omission was inadvertent? Is there no end to their inability to accept the truth, even when the enemy states it so blatantly?

The Chairman reiterated as well his statement that the new State of Palestine, when it is created, will be Judenrein, which does not seem to bother anyone at all in the world community. Quite an amazing fact just 66 years after the end of World War II.

Of course the most amazing thing about the spectacle at the UN and the discussions leading up to it is that those in Israel who questioned every move we made towards accommodation with the Palestinians turned out to be more right than wrong. The criticism over the years whenever the two parties sat down to negotiate was that at whatever point the negotiations stopped, that would be the starting point for the next round of talks. So, to get the Palestinians to the negotiating table Israel would always make some concessions, which the Palestinians would accept and then, after Oslo, or Camp David, or Wye, when they left the negotiations and reverted to their old ways of terrorism and intimidation, in order to get them back to the table Israeli would make more concessions over and above the earlier ones. The critics here of earlier dialogue always warned those of us who believed (and still believe) in the possibility of peace, that this was the Middle Eastern way but our leaders went down that path in any event. Today we are expected to pay the price by making yet more concessions in order to get the parties back to the negotiating table. But that approach has proven worthless in the past and no longer makes sense. Netanyahu’s suggestion that the two parties meet without preconditions is the only sensible platform on which to begin discussions.

Still, Abbas says that if the UN approves statehood then he is ready to sit down and talk with Israel. Netanyahu was right on Friday night, they were both in the same city and in the same building, why couldn’t the negotiations have started there?

Hopefully there will not be a majority in favor of statehood when the item comes up for a vote in the Security Council so that the US will not have to use its promised veto and risk further isolation of itself and Israel. But the present leadership of the Palestinian Authority did not assuage the concerns of those of us in Israel who fear that their real goal is our eviction from this land. And as far as the UN is concerned, we were not comforted either by the fact that so many delegates remained in the room during the Iranian president’s rantings against Israel and the west as well.

The story has many chapters to go and I will continue providing updates and information so that as many people as possible will know that what is written in the New York Times is not the ultimate truth.

2011-09-22T05:36:00.001-07:00

1 Day to Go – Friday is Speech Day

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Tomorrow, Friday, September 23rd, Palestinian Authority Chairman Abbas will speak to the UN General Assembly and lay out his position vis-à-vis UN recognition of statehood for the Palestinian Arab population of Judea and Samaria (and maybe even Gaza). Even now it is not clear what position he will take as he and his associates are clearly under a great deal of pressure to climb down from the high perch they have selected for themselves without losing face, a most important consideration in this part of the world and particularly in Muslim society.

Yesterday, the disappointment on the faces of the Palestinian delegation to the UN during President Obama’s speech was visible to all. Chairman Abbas sat there with his hands clasped to his earphones while next to him sat one of his associates shaking his head in disbelief. And why? Obama made it perfectly clear that while the US remains in favor of two states for two people in this part of the world that the path to achieving that is by negotiation between the two parties and not by UN resolutions. But he reiterated the basic principles that he laid out in his speech in May and which, independent of whether this is what Israel feel is in its best long term interests or not, they are indeed the parameters that have been discussed now for some years.

Obama went further and, to our joy here, underscored the need for any solution to provide Israel the security we must have in order to go to the next step with the Palestinian Arab leadership. From our perspective here the speech was balanced, recognized Israel’s need under any peace agreement to ensure its long term viability, and threw the responsibility for hammering out a solution, if there can be one, to the parties involved.

Of course those on the left in Israel were very quick to condemn the speech as being too soft on Israel. This morning’s Ha’aretz newspaper was full of criticism of the President for bowing to both Israeli pressure and election year political considerations in the US. Some excerpts:

Akiva Eldar penned a piece called “Introducing President Barack Netanyahu” and said that the President’s speech will not advance the peace process one iota. He went on to predict that Obama’s passivity could lead to civil unrest against both Israel and “its American patron” as well as lead to a loss of a Palestinian partner to the two state solution.

Yossi Sarid said that the speech was not good or bad it was simply “another empty speech. Above all, it was a sad, depressing occasion” He went on to say that Obama is not Obama, but simply the man who used to be Obama. He then castigated the President for not showing leadership and standing up for the Palestinian statehood attempt.

Other commentary from the left made additional statements regarding how Obama dropped the ball on this. On the other hand, those of us who have been arguing for months that moving this initiative forward in the UN is a bad move were pleased both by the speech and the efforts that the US is making to ensure that there is no majority for the initiative in the Security Council.

But the pressure must be kept up as the battle is not yet over. The fact, for example, that Rabbi Avi Weiss of Riverdale, NY, who attempted to mount a demonstration yesterday in front of the UN but could only muster 35 people in a city where 1.97 million Jews live speaks to the apathy of the American Jewish Community on the issue. Rabbi Weiss is due much gratitude from all of us for “doing something” and, of course, because he was blocking traffic on First Avenue he got arrested as well. Hopefully he has posted bond and is now out of jail. As for the local community, they should be ashamed of themselves.

Tomorrow, after Chairman Abbas speaks Prime Minister Netanyahu will take the rostrum. Hopefully he will speak the truth similar to what I outlined in my blog a few days ago and point out to those in the chamber that the opportunity to sit and negotiate with Israel has been open to the Palestinian Arab leadership for over a year and it is they who refused to come to the table. While our government is not totally blameless either given some of the characters in our leadership, the unwillingness of the Palestinian Arab leadership to come to the table during the 10 month suspension of building in the settlements was a strategic error and one that defied all logic.

One of the founding fathers of the US and its first president, George Washington is reputed to have said: “The marvel of history is the patience with which men and women submit to the burdens unnecessarily laid upon them by their governments.” His observation has been proven correct over the last 250 year, both for good and for bad. But what both sides to this conflict need now are leaders who can extract themselves from the binding aspect of history and chart a new and dynamic course. Hopefully they are up to the task but tomorrow will tell.

2011-09-20T23:44:00.000-07:00

2 Days to Go – September 23rd is Speech Day

By Sherwin Pomerantz

“The Occupation is Over” was the headline in Washington DC on September 23 1922 as Charles Evans Hughes signed the Hughes-Peynado Agreement that ended the occupation of the Dominican Republic by the United States. No doubt the Palestinian Arab leadership has hope that this Friday, when Chairman Abbas rises to speak to the General Assembly that a similar headline is in the offing for the territories on which his compatriots reside.

But when Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu gets up to speak sometime later in the day, no doubt he will be aware of the fact that on the same September 23rd, but 19 years later, in 1941, the very first gas chamber experiments were conducted at Auschwitz putting into place the planned elimination of the Jews of Europe. While thankfully not 100% successful, six million of our brethren lost their lives in the resulting insanity.

History is capable of teaching us great lessons if only we are prepared to listen. I am always reminded of one of my high school history teachers, Louis Ellenoff (who is most likely no longer around) and the frustration he felt when he sensed that the class was not listening. Not more than 5 feet, 5 inches tall, he would often turn to the blackboard with this back to the class, throw up his hands and exclaim “And the law says: Teach them!” The question remains: Is the world listening now?

The failure of humanity to internalize the lessons of history dooms us to repeat the mistakes of the past. George Santayana first understood this when he coined the phrase “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” We know that ruling over another people is not sustainable, but we also know that attempts to eradicate a people are immoral. Yet the attempts to do so continue.

Those of us who have been arguing against the Palestinian Arab leadership’s move to gain UN recognition for statehood rather than engaging in face-to-face negotiations with Israel to achieve the same purpose, are doing so in the face of the experience of 4,000 years of Jewish history, much of which has been detrimental to our continued existence on this earth.

And our fears are amplified further when we see in the press that over the past weekend Mojtaba Amani, Iran’s Ambassador to Egypt justified the bid for UN recognition of Palestinian statehood in the most heinous way. In an interview with Al-Watan al-Arabi, the weekly Lebanese news magazine, Amani said that the Palestinian Authority’s push for full membership as a UN member state “is a step towards wiping out Israel” and that “the Palestinians must follow a correct example and complete all the measures to prevent the Zionist entity from depriving them their rights.” No doubt when Iranian president Ahmadinejad speaks at the General Assembly this week he will echo these thoughts as he did last year when he called for the elimination of Israel from the Middle East.

So no one should be surprised to hear words of caution and concern coming from Israel’s leadership when one member of the United Nations openly calls for the elimination of another member and the forum of the world body itself is used as the platform to make such a call. No one should be surprised to hear words of caution and concern coming from our leadership when Hamas in Gaza, with whom Abbas and his associates recently signed an agreement to join forces, openly says they will never recognize Israel nor will they ever agree to any understanding between Fatah and Israel. And no one should be surprised to hear words of caution from us when Abbas himself says to the world that no Jews will be allowed to reside in the new state of Palestine, when it is created.

One occupation was ended on September 23rd and the systematic destruction of the Jewish people began on the same day, albeit 19 years apart. None of us want to be witness to the end of another occupation that carries with it the potential of yet another attempt to eliminate the Jewish people from this land which we have built so successfully over the past 63 years. The conscience of the world will be on trial beginning this week. Let’s hope that it is up to the challenge.

2011-09-19T00:01:00.001-07:00

5 Days to Go – Netanyahu's Speech at the UN

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Five days from now Chairman Abbas will submit the request of the Palestinian Arab leadership to the UN to approve their desire for statehood. He will address the General Assembly on Thursday evening of this week and, following his address, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu will speak to the assemblage as well.

Here is what I think our Prime Minister should say:

Members of the world body I stand here this evening as the democratically elected head of the State of Israel, the legitimate homeland of the Jewish people as reaffirmed in San Remo, Italy on April 25, 1920 at a meeting of the allied nations victorious in World War I and based on our 4,000 year connection to this land. At that time those assembled carved up the conquered Ottoman Empire into Iraq, Syria and Palestine and codified the desire of the victors to create a national home for the Jewish people.

The language used did not specify that all of Palestine was to be included in this formulation and the United Nations on November 29, 1947 voted to partition Palestine into two states, one Jewish and the other Arab. We accepted that decision and six months later, when the British departed, we declared our independence and our desire to live in peace with our neighbors. The then Arab leadership, the forefathers of the people who now are asking this body to approve its petition for statehood, refused to accept the verdict of the General Assembly and went to war against the fledgling state of Israel.

We were victorious in that war and in the many wars that followed including the Six Day War of 1967 when we captured Gaza, the West Bank, which we call Judea and Samaria, as well as the Yom Kippur War of 1973. Each time we offered to sit down with the Palestinian Arab leadership and discuss an end to the conflict and a final determination of borders so that two states for two peoples could be a reality. Each time we were rebuffed. As a result we became responsible for the welfare of the indigent population, a responsibility we never desired and found seemingly impossible to end.

In 1993 we were finally able to get the Palestinian Arab leadership to sit down with us in Oslo and craft what everyone hoped would be the start of a lasting peace in our land and an eventual end to what is generally known as “the occupation.” But the results were disappointing. The violence against our people continued and the hoped for end of conflict did not materialize. Nevertheless, in July of 2000 my predecessor, Ehud Barak, came to Camp David and offered the Palestinian Arab leadership an independent state on terms that we considered fair and just. But that offer was rejected out of hand and no alternative offer was ever forthcoming from the other side, and the violence continued.

In August 2005, in the belief that in the long term Gaza would have to become part and parcel of the State of Palestine, and as a gesture of good will, we unilaterally withdrew all of the Israelis living in Gaza amid painful discourse within Israel. Our hope was that the local leadership in Gaza, without the interference of Israeli residents and military, would take that land and turn it into the Singapore of the Middle East. Instead, it became the launching pad for continuous rocket attacks against out people and later a territory fully controlled by Hamas, a terrorist organization bent on our expulsion from the region.

Now the current Palestinian Arab leadership comes to this General Assembly and asks you to approve their application for statehood so that they can then sit down with us and negotiate peace? But why do they need this? This body voted for Palestinian statehood in 1947 and, for the last 64 years that option has not been exercised. At the insistence of the US government in 2010 we agreed to a 10 month stoppage of settlement construction in an effort to draw the Palestinian Arab leadership back to the negotiating table, but they refused. Yet, when the hiatus on construction was about to expire, they then came back and said if we would extend that suspension yet again, they would consider sitting down at the negotiating table.

In speeches at Bar Ilan University in Israel last year and again in the US Congress this year I made it clear that I fully support the two state solution, and that I was and am prepared to go to Ramallah to meet Chairman Abbas, or to welcome him to Jerusalem or to meet in a neutral location such as Brussels. Instead of an agreement to meet, the position of the Palestinian Arab leadership seemed to harden even further seeing the UN as the next forum for their desire for statehood and now saying that if statehood is approved they are then prepared to sit with us and discuss peace! Based on past history why should we believe them and, more importantly, why should you?

The issues that have been raised by the Palestinian Arab leadership as obstacles to peace need to be resolved in negotiation before this body welcomes the new State of Palestine into membership. For us to support UN membership for a new country that stands fast on its demand for the right of return of all of its past refugees and their descendants until today, that demands the re-partition of Jerusalem so that it can be the capital of the new country, and insists, 66 years after a Holocaust that killed a third of our people, that their new country be Judenrein, would be nothing less than signing our own death warrant and I was not elected Prime Minister to preside over the demise of the enterprise called Israel. And I don’t believe that your intent is to do so either.

So what options are left to me as the head of the government of a sovereign member of the United Nations in good standing, faced with the situation I have just described and having heard this week, as well, from the head of another member nation, Iran, speaking to this forum and urging the dissolution of my country? What would you expect me to do that will ensure the continued viability of the strongest democracy in our part of the world that, through our technological development, has contributed so much to the quality of life of people everywhere? Well, you will be surprised at what I am going to say next.

I am not in favor of simply approving the request of the Palestinian Arab leadership to become a member of the United Nations. But I do believe that the status quo is not sustainable either. As such, I suggest that this body agree to a one year conditional approval of Palestine as a full member of the United Nations with the caveat that if there has been no agreement finalized between us by that time that approval will be revoked. Conditional membership means that while Palestine can sit as a member of the General Assembly, it cannot access other arms of the United Nations, such as the International Court of Justice, during this interim period.

You may then ask: What incentive do we in Israel have to finalize such an agreement? The answer is very simple. Our people are as tired of war and conflict as are the Palestinians. The overwhelming majority of our population would like to see an end to the conflict so that they can live normal lives and stop sending their husbands, sons, and fathers to fight. We believe that with peace we can continue to assist the Palestinian economy to grow and prosper as evidenced by the existing investments in growth funds there by Israeli venture capitalists such as Chemi Peres. We have said for many years that it is in our mutual interest to find a way to co-exist in peace and security.

One year ago US President Obama stood here and expressed his hope that this year would see the entry of the new State of Palestine into the United Nations. But while his efforts and those of the Quartet, among others, were both sincere and appreciated, peace cannot come to our joint land by the efforts of outsiders, no matter how well intentioned. Peace between us is in our hands and, from this podium, I extend the hand of peace to Mahmoud Abbas and say let us sit down together and, between us, hammer out the framework of an agreement the will bring this conflict to a satisfactory end. Neither of us will achieve all we desire but if, at the end of this journey, the future of our children and our children’s children will be secure we will have achieved infinitely more than our predecessors, and engender the eternal gratitude of both of our peoples.

Next week, Jews around the world will usher in the new year of 5772. Unlike most cultures, we do so with prayer, family gatherings and awareness of the biblical injunction to hear the sound of the shofar, the ram’s horn, which reminds us all of God’s power in this universe. And then we greet each other with the words l’shanah tovah tikatev v’taihatem which means may you be inscribed and sealed for a good year. That is our wish today. That the new year about to begin will be one where all of us will be inscribed in the book of life and sealed for a good year of peace and tranquility once and for all for all mankind. We can hope for no less. Thank you!

2011-09-15T07:07:00.001-07:00

7 Days to Go – Is There a Solution?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Now there is one week to September 20th when the Palestinian Arab leadership will submit its request to the UN to approve their desire for statehood. The clock is ticking.

As for what will happen in New York next week, finally the American Jewish community seems to be planning some demonstrations across from the UN, although in my opinion the number of people expected is still too low. For example, I received the following from a friend here:

"A crowd of 15,000 people is expected outside the United Nations September 21, when a coalition of Jewish and non-Jewish supporters of Israel is scheduled to hold a rally on behalf of the Jewish state. While the main focus is the Palestinian Authority's bid for General Assembly recognition as a sovereign state, the demonstration will serve as a platform to voice opposition to the "Durban III" Conference against Racism, which illustrates the UN's bias against Israel."

"Chairman Calev Myers of the Jerusalem Center for Justice, one of the movers behind the rally, said, Sunday, that people cannot be silent in face of the world's hypocrisy and that this summer has shown that demonstrations accomplish things, adding that the September 21st rally will be something that cannot be ignored."

Well, if 15,000 materialize that will be good but just a tenth of what is needed. Rumor has it that some other groups are working on demonstrations as well but, as I have found over the last few weeks when inquiring about the subject, no one wants to provide details. So it is difficult for me to understand how a good crowd will show up if no one wants to speak about it publicly, even at this late date. Time will tell whether there will be enough people there to make the point. I certainly hope so although I have met absolutely no one in my 8 days here in New York who is planning on being there, so my concern about the size of any demonstration is real.

There is now, of course, a great deal of material coming out on possible solutions to the challenges that will face Israel after the UN vote, however it goes, although the presumption is that a US veto in the security council will further isolate both Israel and the US. But the fallout will be dramatically different for both countries. The US, in spite of the current economic challenges it faces, remains a world power with a huge economy, 307 million people and still generally held in high regard worldwide. But Israel is a small country, just 7 million people, seen (incorrectly) in many places in the world as the source of all of the globe’s problems. While at the moment the Israeli economy is thriving, eventually continued isolation will have its economic effect as well and there is no telling where that will lead.

So Israel’s challenge right now is to begin to strategize how it will cope in a world that will be significantly different after September than it is today. Further political isolation, the threat of civil unrest in both the Israeli and Palestinian sectors, a potentially declining economy, all combined could have significant long term negative results for the country. As a born optimist, I believe we have both the intellectual capacity and the moral fibre to meet the challenge and come out whole, but it will not be an easy path to tread and our leadership will need to be incredibly creative as it deals with these issues.

This morning’s papers indicate that Prime Minister Netanyahu has decided to travel to New York and address the General Assembly on behalf of the people of Israel. In principle that is a good thing and he should be the one to present our case to the world, not someone else in the government as was previously planned. But he needs to be careful not to lecture the world on behalf of the Jewish people. He should, of course, underscore the need for face-to-face negotiations here in order to move forward with any end of the conflict discussions. In addition, the thrust of his comments should indicate that we recognize that the political map in the region will change after the UN session ends later this fall and that Israel has a plan to deal with that and continue in its quest to be a responsible member of the world community. I certainly hope he is up to the task as failure in this effort is simply not an option.

2011-09-13T15:21:00.000-07:00

8 Days to Go – The Time to SHOUT!

By Sherwin Pomerantz

The countdown continues with just 8 days to September 20th when the Palestinian Arab leadership will submit its request to the UN to approve their desire for statehood. One gets the feeling that it is a replay of the final scene from the movie Thelma & Louise, with great numbers of experienced diplomats worldwide saying this is a bad move, while the powers that be continue to the edge of the cliff undaunted by such concerns.

It seems inconceivable that it was just eighteen years ago today, September 13, 1993, that then Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, of blessed memory, former President Clinton and then PLO Chairman Arafat with Shimon Peres looking on signed what has become known as the Oslo Accords which many of us thought heralded a new era of peace and understanding in our part of the world. I can remember Rabin’s words even today when he turned to Arafat and said “no more wars.” How we were all misled.

Today, 18 years later, Israel finds itself probably more isolated than it has been since the founding of the state. Some salient points:

Item: Iran threatens Israel and the Jewish people with annihilation, its president denies that the Holocaust existed, and he never misses an opportunity to threaten the US as well. Yet, he is given a visa to enter the US and, according to news reports today, will have a number of meetings while there including a dinner with at least 15 students from Columbia University (and I have no doubt, to our eternal shame, that some of them will be Jewish as well).

Item: The prime minister of Turkey continues his inflammatory rhetoric against Israel which began not, as some would have it, with the Mavi Marmara incident in May 2010 but in Davos on January 29, 2009. Art that time he castigated Shimon Peres, the President of Israel, for Israel’s alleged commission of war crimes and then walked off the stage in a huff saying he would not return to Davos. Today, as he ramps up his anti-Israel tone to new levels he sees himself as the new political leader of the Muslim world who must vilify Israel in order to gain credence with that constituency. It amazes me that anyone is surprised by his behavior and the direction he is trying to take Turkey. No doubt Ataturk, the founder of modern Turkey, is rolling over in his grave watching this. This, the very same Turkey that openly welcomed the Jews of Iberia to its shores during the inquisition and gave them a safe haven for over 500 years.

Item: Europe, with a history of anti-Semitism of which it should be ashamed for all time, chooses to take sides with the enemies of Israel under the so-called protection of human rights umbrella. Witness this statement made on August 12th by Catherine Ashton, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the Commission: "It is with deep regret that, once again, I received information of the publicly stated intention of the Israeli government to continue settlement expansion in East Jerusalem. The EU has repeatedly called on Israel to end all settlement activity, including natural growth, and to dismantle outposts erected since March 2001. Settlement activity threatens the viability of an agreed two-state solution and undermines ongoing efforts to resume negotiations." No mention made, of course, that Israel halted all settlement activity for 10 months last year and that still was not sufficient to bring the Palestinian leadership to the table.

Item: Egypt’s new political leadership, in an effort to protect the building which houses the Israeli embassy in Cairo (after protesters took down the Israeli flag a week earlier) builds a wall around the building. But the mob is not satisfied and late last week attacks the wall in an attempt to tear it down. As a result, Israel brought all of its people home as Egypt could not guarantee the safety of the legation. So a cold peace just went into the deep freeze.

The UN General Assembly, when it most likely approves the request of the Palestinian Arab leadership for the recognition of statehood, will create a major problem for the region, as the New York Times said in an editorial a few days ago: “A United Nations vote on Palestinian membership would be ruinous. Yet with little time left before the U.N. General Assembly meets, the United States, Israel and Europe have shown insufficient urgency or boldness in trying to find a compromise solution. The need for action is even more acute after alarming tensions flared in recent days between Israel and two critical regional players — Egypt and Turkey.”

The saddest part of all of this is that the world has not heard much in the way of objections, concern and anger about all of this from the Jewish community. Yes, there are some petitions circulating on the Internet and that is good, but where are the mass demonstrations? Why won’t 350,000 American Jews and their friends demonstrate at the UN next week and show their concern for the future of Israel which is also the key to the long term future of the American Jewish community?

Last weekend I met committed religious Jews who were not even aware of what will be going on over the next weeks at the UN and its potential impact on them as well as those of us who live in Israel. How can we understand that? Is that even possible? Are we to stand by silently once again and watch as the world demonizes us? And does the world really believe that if there was a Palestinian state that there would be peace in the Middle East? Or that the simple act of validating Palestinian statehood will solve the world’s problems?

Let’s hope that what Martin Luther King said during his lifetime remains true, “A lie cannot live.” But the lie needs to be exposed and the way to do it is for First Avenue in New York City to be made impassable next week by the sheer numbers who are prepared to stand there and expose the lie to the world. The lessons of history demand no less than that from us!

2011-09-09T09:18:00.000-07:00

10 Days to Go – Upping the Ante

By Sherwin Pomerantz

In just 10 days the 66th Regular Session of the UN General Assembly will receive a request from the Palestinian Arab leadership to approve their desire for statehood, even though there is a ground swell of opinion worldwide that this is not a smart move on their part. Reports now indicate that the US has issued a formal request to Chairman Abbas that he not go ahead with this initiative. The US has also reiterated its position that if the vote comes to the Security Council, which it will prior to going to the General Assembly, the US will use its veto to block the Council’s approval.

News coming out of Israel this week quotes Chairman Abbas as saying that once the UN approves the request for statehood, the Palestinian leadership is prepared to sit down with Israel and return to negotiations. One wonders why they need to wait until then when the opportunity to sit down with Israel has been out there for not months, but years? Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu this week has even done what I have been urging for months, openly stating that he is ready to sit down with Abbas anywhere: Jerusalem, Ramallah, or even Brussels, to negotiate peace without prior conditions. But, of course, Abbas wants all kinds of preconditions in place so that Israel can tip its full hand before the negotiations begin. Welcome to the Middle East!

Simultaneously Turkey continues its sabre rattling with PM Erdogan saying that when he decides to go to Gaza he will be accompanied by Turkish military vessels for protection. But clearly this will not be for protection, but simply to dare Israel to engage those vessels in order to prevent the breaking of the blockade of Gaza which would then lead to an even further deterioration of relations or even regional war. To top it off Turkish President Gül calls Israel an “ungrateful burden” to the world and to the region.

The only people that don’t seem to be perturbed by any of this negativism is Standard & Poor’s, which just raised its rating of Israel’s financial condition from A to A+ saying that this reflects “the responsible economic policy of the Government of Israel.” This is the same S&P that recently downgraded the US’ credit rating but that seems to have no problem with Israel in spite of all the sabre rattling going on. What a world eh?

As for the need to demonstrate at the UN in the coming weeks, kudos go to Rabbi Avi Weiss of New York who is organizing what he calls “massive civil disobedience” opposite the UN on September 20th. Rabbi Weiss, who has consistently been at the forefront of demonstrations in places where the organized Jewish community has generally cautioned a soft approach, is to be commended for taking the leadership in this area and organizing this protest of what will surely be a major period of Israel-bashing at the UN. He is an example for all of us as to what one person can do when properly motivated.

All of this, of course, supports the old adage that there are people who look at a glass and see it half full while others look at the same glass and see it as half empty. As I have often said you cannot live in Israel and be a pessimist, as only optimism enables people to prevail here.

Tomorrow, in synagogues worldwide the portion of Ki Tetze will be read from the Torah. In addition to setting out a series of laws to be observed when living in the land of Israel, the portion also includes the reference to Amalek and the fact that he was representative of those who arise in every generation to do terrible things to the Jewish people. It will be a sobering reminder, as it is supposed to be, of both the continuing threat to our survival that we face on a regular basis and, more importantly, that all of those who have sought to destroy us are long gone from this earth. May that positive outcome continue for all time to come.

2011-09-07T08:32:00.001-07:00

14 Days to Go – Turkey Goes “Bananas”

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 14 days to go to September 20th when the Palestinian Arab leadership intends to present their petition for the UN approval of statehood, things are definitely heating up in the region.

On Monday morning the early flight on Turkish Airlines from Tel Aviv to Istanbul landed there with, of course, dozens of Israelis traveling to Turkey on business. Many of these people are there regularly, either once a week or once a month. Contrary to normal procedure, those traveling on Israeli passports were herded into a holding area before arriving at passport control. All of their passports were taken by the authorities and, according to the report of one of the passengers each of the Israelis had two Turkish policemen guarding them during the 90 minutes that they were detained. The travelers were not advised as to what the problem was and at the end of the 90 minutes, their passports were returned and they entered the country. My information is that in retaliation Israel did something similar later in the day with Turkish passport holders trying to enter the country. Sounds like a game we used to play as kids but, sadly, this is real.

For my readers who have not traveled to Turkey, it is important to know that those of us who hold Israeli passports generally use them to enter Turkey even though we might also have US passports. The reason is one of pure economics. US citizens need to purchase a visa to enter the country whereas Israelis enter under Turkey’s visa waiver program. So one can imagine not only the shock of this change of procedure, but also the feelings of discomfort (and even rage) on the part of those Jews who, once again in history, were asked to surrender their passports simply because they were Jewish. I need not go further into the memories generated by such action.

Clearly the Erdogan government is on a track to use Israel as a scapegoat to divert attention from all his other problems including the frustration with Syria with whom Turkey shares a border, the continuing protests and bombings by the Kurds living in Turkey, the frustration of the Armenians in not having Turkey recognize the Armenian Genocide and the general snubbing of Turkey by the EU. Erdogan’s most recent move on Tuesday to also consider freezing bilateral trade between Turkey and Israel which represents a hefty $1.5 billion annually to the Turkish economy shows just how far he is prepared to go to make his point. If he also carries out his threat to travel to Gaza accompanied by Turkish warships, the winds of war in the region will pick up considerable speed and strength.

All of this, of course, seemingly in response to Israel’s reaction to the attempt by some Turkish ships in May 2010 to break the blockade of Gaza and the just-issued UN Palmer Report on the incident.

The Wall Street Journal in a lead editorial earlier this week was on target when it said:

"Here's a story for the man-bites-dog folder: The United Nations has conducted another inquiry into an Israeli military operation—and produced a report that mainly vindicates the Jewish state. And here, alas, is a story for the dog-bites-man folder: The Turkish government has responded to the U.N. report by withdrawing its ambassador from Tel Aviv and expelling Israel's from Ankara."

"The Palmer report—named for the inquiry's chairman, former New Zealand Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer—was commissioned by the U.N.'s Secretary General to investigate the May 2010 "flotilla incident," when six ships sailing from Turkey to Gaza on an alleged humanitarian mission were boarded by Israeli commandos enforcing a naval blockade of Gaza. Nine passengers were killed (and several Israeli soldiers badly beaten) in the ensuing melee, sparking a crisis in Jerusalem's already frayed relations with Ankara."

One can never predict what will happen in the Middle East as everything here defies logic.

Meanwhile, the UN activities related to our part of the world remain on track for later this month preceded by the Durban 3 conference against racism which, once again, will disintegrate into an Israel-bashing event of significant proportions. There does not seem to be any activity against this going on in the Jewish community in the US except for some petitions that are being circulated on the internet. However, there is one group planning a huge demonstration at the Isaiah Wall across from the UN (see http://www.protestdurban3.com/). A group of Christian clergy is putting this together on September 21st at noon on 47th Street between 1st and 2nd Avenues in order to demonstrate their disappointment in using the UN as a platform to target Jews and Israel. While I applaud their efforts it is sad, once again, that the local Jewish community is not part of this.

Nevertheless, the pressure at the UN and in other spheres of activity must remain at a high level so that the world is made to understand that Israel is here to stay and that all of the world’s problems cannot reasonably be blamed on the existence of 7 million people in one small piece of land at the eastern end of the Mediterranean. The perverse logic that brings people to such a conclusion speaks to the ignorance of mankind in the face of truth.

2011-09-04T18:46:00.000-07:00

16 Days to Go – Cooler Heads Needed Here

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 16 days to go to September 20th when the Palestinian Arab leadership intends to present their petition for the UN approval of statehood, there seems to be a new initiative on the part of the United States to convince the Palestinians not to go through with this.

The reasons are pretty obvious to all. In the first place, the US has indicated that while it will use its veto power in the Security Council to block that body’s approval of the petition, it really does not want to do this. If it does use the veto it will destroy the US’ credibility both with the Palestinian Arab leadership as well as the rest of the Arab world and make it impossible for the US to have any long term role in further peace efforts in the region.

Secondly, there is great concern throughout the world and the region as to what will happen on the ground after the vote and clearly the US would prefer to see the issue not come to the table thereby averting an unpredictable set of events that could be difficult to manage and contain. The Palestinian Arab leadership for its part seems hell bent on going through with this but, of course, this is the Middle East and the word “certain” does not appear in the general diplomatic language of the region.

As if this was not enough of an issue to deal with over the next two weeks, Turkey continues its threats against Israel and every day seems to up the ante for restoring relations between the two countries to the level they were up until the flotilla incident in May 2010. Turkey has now downgraded its emissary in Tel Aviv to the level of 2nd Secretary and is threatening to take military action should anyone try to interfere with their shipping in the Eastern Mediterranean. The clear implication being that if it should try to break the blockade of Gaza by itself and Israel were to try to block such an attempt, Turkey would resort to military action. That threat seems to be spooking the west as well.

In a reversal of its general trend to always criticize Israel for whatever ills befall the region, the New York Times today in a lead editorial said the following on this subject:

"We don’t blame Israel for wondering if Turkey is keeping this conflict going to burnish its standing in the Arab world. Turkey is risking a lot, including billions in trade with Israel and its reputation as a responsible international player. Israel certainly doesn’t need to be any more isolated than it is. Israel should apologize for the deaths. And Turkey should stop upping the ante."

I would agree that Israel should apologize for the deaths of the Turks on board the Mavi Marmara, which is simply good conduct between friends. We would expect no less if the tables were turned. The Israeli government’s reluctance to do so is just foolhardy diplomacy. But Turkey’s continued harping on the subject and using it as an excuse to change the relationship between the two countries is even more unreasonable.

Herman Wouk would say that the winds of war are kicking up quite a storm in our region and, of course, when that happens any misstep can cause the diplomatic parrying to turn into full scale hostilities.

Cooler heads need to prevail if war of any kind is to be averted. Turkey should tone down the rhetoric, Israel should do what it needs to do to show its good faith in that effort, and the Palestinian Arab leadership should withdraw their petition for UN membership as they stand to lose much more by going ahead with this than the gain they might have convinced themselves will be theirs.

But, of course, when was the last time cool heads prevailed in our part of the world? Let’s hope!

2011-09-02T17:56:00.001-07:00

11 Days to Go – Resetting the Clock

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 11 days to go to the opening of the 66th Regular Session of the UN General Assembly on September 13th it seems now that the Palestinian Arab leadership will not submit their request for statehood until September 20th, so we will re-set the countdown clock by one week and now call it 18 days to go.

The real question remains what the Palestinian Arab leadership really wants at the end of the day, a state or the ultimate elimination of Israel? Many people, of course, believe the latter.

But today there is yet another new regional development that is also quite worrisome. The UN has published what is known as the Palmer Report on the Gaza Flotilla Incident of May 2010. The report sustains Israel’s right to impose the blockade on Gaza as an enemy entity bent on Israel’s destruction while somewhat castigating Israel for the manner in which the country approached the Mavi Marmara and carried out its attempt to foil the blockade.

Turkey is clearly disturbed that the report was not more forceful and that it did not lay the entire blame for everything at the feet of Israel. Given that the Turkish Government announced today that it was expelling Israel’s envoy to the country and cutting all military cooperation with Israel, and that this is only the first of a series of steps to downgrade the relationship between the two countries, the situation is of concern.

On the Israeli side some of the members of the government here suggested that diplomacy demands that we, in turn, expel the Turkish envoy to Israel in retaliation for Turkey’s action. Time will tell whether there is sufficient support for that in Israel but, no doubt, it will be a popular action among the locals here.

But what is more disturbing is the severing of military cooperation. On the one hand, the strategic cooperation in the defense sector between Israel and Turkey has been critical to the long term interests of both countries and the attempt to maintain a relatively balanced military footprint in the region. My guess is that the defense establishments in both countries are upset about this decision by the political leadership in Turkey.

However, what is of even more concern is the indication as to who is really calling the shots in Turkey. Traditionally ever since the modern country of Turkey was founded by Ataturk as a secular society, it has been the military that has zealously protected that concept and made it work in this Muslim country. In the past when the political element tried to move the country away from secularism to a more traditionally religious framework, the military took action to prevent that.

Two months ago the political leadership sacked a whole raft of senior generals and replaced them with people more in keeping with the desire to increase the religious influence in society. Today’s action takes this one step further by clearly indicating that the political establishment is in full control even over the military. The stage seems set, therefore, for an increasing amount of religious influence in all spheres of government which will also have the effect of moving the country further out of the western political orbit.

To those of us who have spent considerable time in Turkey this is a sad turn of events as the country was always held up as an example of a Muslim country that could be politically secular, democratic in nature and a full respecter of human rights. Over the last few years as a result of the emergence of the AKP party as the dominant political force in the country, human rights have been consistently violated. Recent statistics have shown, for example, that Turkey has the largest number of media people in jail for taking public positions against the stance of the ruling party. The purge of the military last month was another nail in the coffin of the secular democracy. Today’s action against Israel shows just how far the power balance has shifted in favor of the AKP.

The sands in the region have shifted dramatically over the past six months and there is no telling how far they will move. Israel, of course, as the only truly democratic country in the region (admittedly not as much of a western democracy as a Bolshevik one) will have its mettle tested as it attempts to navigate these difficult waters simultaneously dealing with the ongoing events at the UN. To say the least, the next few months will bear critical watching.

2011-08-30T06:20:00.000-07:00

14 Days to Go – Do the Palestinians Want Two States?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Two weeks to go to the opening of the 66th Regular Session of the UN General Assembly on September 13th and the vote to grant the Palestinians statehood. The real question of course is do the Palestinian Arab leaders really want a state of their own side by side with Israel or, at the end of the day do they see this as simply the next step to eliminating Israel altogether?

While no one can say for sure, although plenty of people here think that they know the answers, let’s take a look at some things that we do know.

Chairman Abbas continues to refuse to recognize Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish people and says that he will only recognize Israel as the country of Israelis just as Palestine is the country of the Palestinians. The problem with this formulation is that then Abbas goes on to say that the future state of Palestine will not have any Jews living in it. Why? Because it is the national homeland of the Palestinian people, and, as such should not have any Jews living in it. Abbas clearly figures that if he recognizes Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish people Israel might very well say, similarly to what he says about Palestine, that the country can only have Jews living in it (even though everyone knows that would not be the position of the government here).

What does that have to say about the Palestinian Arab leadership’s view of a two state solution? Does it support the concept or detract from it? By the way, Abbas then goes on to say that if there are multinational forces stationed in Palestine to keep the peace they cannot contain any Israelis even they are citizens of other countries whose troops are part of the peace keeping contingent. That’s less bothersome than his original formulation a few weeks ago when he said those forces could not contain Jews.

Yesterday Abbas came out with another clarification. As some are now saying that if the UN votes in favor of a Palestinian state, this might abrogate the right of “refugees” to return to their homes in Israel, Abbas now says “Absolutely not.” His position is that even if the state of Palestine is created side by side with Israel, the refugees will still have a right to return to their former homes in Israel and this will be part of further negotiations. Remember that as of the end of 2010 there were 5 million refugees according to UNRWA (who counts as refugees all of the descendants of those who left Israel 63 years ago) of whom 1.5 million were still living in refugee camps. Does this support the concept of two states living side by side in peace and security or detract from it?

Earlier this week Palestinian Authority Minister of Prisoner Affairs Issa Qaraqi’ was quoted as saying Israel is the “major harvesting and trading center” of body organs in the world. Claiming that Israel was “holding the remains of 338 Arab and Palestinian fighters” in secret cemeteries, he said the “holding of the martyrs’ remains for many years casts doubts and accusations that Israel assassinated them after detention, or harvested their organs.” Does such language contribute to the development of two states living side by side n peace and security or detract from it?

And finally, recently senior Hamas official Mahmoud Zahar speaking to Al Jazeera, said that Palestinians will not give up their right to Palestine, and will not recognize the rule of Poles and Ethiopians in their land. He clarified by saying “Talks are a means, but recognition is a matter of principle. Palestine is hallowed ground and Hamas will never recognize Israel.” What do you think? Does such language contribute to the development of two states living side by side in peace and security or detract from it?

It would certainly seem that given the fact that the Palestinian Arab leadership had numerous opportunities to gain statehood side by side with Israel in the past and rejected it, the current language certainly does not augur well for progress towards a balanced two state solution. Rather it gives credence to those who take the position that the ultimate goal is to expunge Israel from the region.

So it would seem that the task before Israel’s diplomats is to continue to do all in their power to influence the “important” countries of the world to either vote against the UN resolution for statehood or, if they are not of a mind to do so, at least to work on moderating the language of the resolution so that it becomes less of a dramatic step. Meanwhile, the rest of us need to keep up the pressure with letters, demonstrations and a lot of noise objecting to this march by the Palestinian Arab leadership to what could end up to be theirs and our undoing.

2011-08-29T06:43:00.001-07:00

15 Days to Go – Abbas Still Up a Tree

By Sherwin Pomerantz

1 day and two weeks to the opening of the 66th Regular Session of the UN General Assembly on September 13th and the vote to grant the Palestinians statehood. The Palestinian Arab leadership remains up the tree that they have climbed with no indication that they are even close to finding the ladder.

Let me share with you some telling events over the past day or so.

Larry Derfner, the Jerusalem Post op-ed writer (who was once a nice Jewish kid from Los Angeles) after penning that despicable piece on his website justifying killing of Israelis by Palestinians when they see no other alternative protest available to them has now posted an apology (see http://israelleft.com/2011/08/26/apology/). In his apology he says:

"I didn’t mean to say anything “good” about Palestinian terror against Israelis – I see nothing good in it whatsoever, and I thought I made that clear, but I see now that I didn’t. I wrote that because of the occupation, Palestinians are “justified” in attacking, even killing Israelis, that they have the “right” to do so. Later on I stressed that I didn’t want them to kill my countrymen, and that I would do anything necessary to stop it. "

"What I mean is this: The occupation does not justify Palestinian terror. It does, however, provoke it. Palestinians do not have the right to attack or kill Israelis. They, do, however, have the incentive to, and part, though not all, of that incentive is provided them by the occupation. I believe that if Israel gives the Palestinians their independence, we have enough military power to neutralize whatever leftover incentive they would have to attack us. So my purpose with regard to Palestinian terror against Israelis is not to legitimize it, God forbid, but to end it."

The original post is no longer on his blog but not sure that the apology is complete given the second paragraph, but you can judge for yourselves,

Early this morning Israel once again saw the ugly face of terror as a 20-year old Palestinian Arab from Nablus/Shechem hijacked a taxi in Tel Aviv and tried to ram it into a nightclub full of teenagers having an end of summer bash. Fortunately, this time, no one was killed as the police were alerted and blocked the entrance to the club, although eight people were injured (one seriously), all of whom were security personnel. Of course, as in the terror attack on the Egyptian border last week, no condemnation of the event from the Palestinian Arab leadership was forthcoming

In this morning’s papers PA Chairman Abbas is quoted as saying that he is prepared to withdraw the application to UN for Palestinian statehood if Israel is prepared to come to the negotiating table as long as two conditions are met. First, that we agree to the 1967 borders as the basis for an eventual peace agreement (no mention being made of land swaps of course) and second, that Israel ceases all construction in Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem. The building issue, you will recall, was a gift presented to Abbas by President Obama as previously negotiations were always possible even though building was going on in the settlements. But when President Obama made the cessation of building a condition, Abbas, of course, could demand no less and he has remained with that demand.

Yet the ladder that he is seeking to climb down from the precarious perch in which he has placed himself now seems to have just two rungs, neither of which Israel is likely to reinforce. Nevertheless, perhaps Abbas himself realizes that at the end of the day, both Israel and the Palestinians need the support of the US as we both move forward, while forcing the hand of the US to veto a Palestinian state in the Security Council will not inure to the long term benefit of the Palestinian Arab population. Concurrently, Israel is restraining itself in the response to the increasing terrorism and rocket attacks in a parallel attempt not to rile the US administration. As I write this the Israeli and Egyptian security forces are massed on their shared border given that intelligence reports indicate an imminent Islamic Jihad terrorist attack in the south. Welcome to the bad old days in Israel.

Last night I heard someone describe the Palestinian leadership’s march to the UN as similar to Thelma & Louise’s rush to the end of the cliff in their 1966 Ford Thunderbird convertible. Hopefully Abbas and his people will not follow their example but will find the brake pedal in time!

2011-08-28T02:50:00.001-07:00

16 Days to Go – Is The Effort Against the UN Vote for Palestinian Statehood Pointless?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 16 days to the opening of the 66th Regular Session of the UN General Assembly on September 13th and the vote to grant the Palestinians statehood, Israel’s Ambassador to the UN, Ron Prossor, has come out publicly with an admission that the UN battle is probably lost.

In a statement published in this morning’s papers here he is quoted in a classified cable to Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs as follows: “The maximum that we can hope to gain [at the UN vote] is for a group of states who will abstain or be absent during the vote.” He added that his comments were based on more than 60 meetings he had held during the past few weeks with his colleagues at the UN, finishing off with “Only a few countries will vote against the Palestinian initiative.” Foreign Ministry sources estimate that 130-140 countries will vote in favor of the motion when it comes to the floor of the General Assembly.

As things look right now, Prime Minister Netanyahu will not go to New York to speak on behalf of Israel but, instead, will probably ask President Shimon Peres to do the honors as he is more likely to present a moderate and conciliatory face to the world body (excluding those, of course, who will probably leave the room as soon as he gets up to speak).

I believe that our efforts to lobby the UN delegates must continue even in the face of this assessment by someone for whom I have the utmost respect. Why? Not only because, as Yogi Berra said, “it ain’t over ‘til the fat lady sings” but more importantly, because our voices need to be heard. Remember, that the bashing of Israel continues worldwide and we simply do not have the luxury of stopping the pressure, even if it may not do any good in the short term.

Last week, for example, Iran celebrated Quds Day, which is the day towards the end of Ramadan on which they schedule their annual Jerusalem solidarity rally. At that event, General Naghdi, the head of the Baseej organization (volunteers committed to enforce Islamic behaviour, crush protests, mete out beatings, carry out torture and extra-judicial executions [see http://middleeast.about.com/od/iran/f/basij-vigilantes.htm]) opined:

"We recommend to the Zionists to pack their furniture and return to their countries. And if they really insist on staying, they should know that a time will come that they will not even have time to pack their suitcases."

After which of course, the President of Iran went on to say:

"Do not think that your existence (i.e. Israel) will be recognized with the recognition of the Palestinian state. You have no place in our region and among our nations, and you will not be able to continue your ignominious life on even a small part of the Palestinian territories."

He then called for the annihilation of Israel at all costs and, unable to resist the opportunity to do so, once again called the holocaust a lie.

And if all of this is not bad enough, along comes regular Jerusalem Post op-ed writer Larry Derfner who posted the following to his blog on August 21st:

"I think a lot of people who realize that the occupation is wrong also realize that the Palestinians have the right to resist it – to use violence against Israelis, even to kill Israelis, especially when Israel is showing zero willingness to end the occupation, which has been the case since the Netanyahu government took over (among other times in the past)."

He, of course, later in the post goes on to say the “while I think the Palestinians have the right to use terrorism against us, I don’t want them to use it, I don’t want to see Israelis killed and, as an Israeli, I would do whatever was necessary to stop a Palestinian, oppressed or not, from killing one of my countrymen.” Too late Derfner, you can be sure that the earlier statement is the one that the anti-Israel forces will be quoting saying that even well respected Israelis believe terrorism is justifiable. Then he ends with the even more galling statement “Writing this is not treason. It is an attempt at patriotism.”

So the venom continues and whatever actually happens at the UN, the tension will not subside, peace will not come to this part of the world, and anti-Semitism will continue its attraction for all too many people with whom we share this planet. As such, we have no alternative but to keep the flame of passion for our rights to this land on a very high setting and to seize every opportunity to call the world’s attention to our commitment never to be forced from our homes. So please, make your voices heard at every opportunity.

2011-08-26T07:52:00.001-07:00

18 Days to Go – Where Will You Be on September 13th?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With just 18 days to the opening of the 66th Regular Session of the UN General Assembly on September 13th and the vote to grant Palestinians statehood, it is interesting to note what the Jewish community in America will be doing on that day.

One would think, of course, given the potential gravity of the situation, that there will be mass demonstrations around the country and an even larger one at the Isaiah wall across from the UN. But, think again. Here is what I found when looking at the event list of four of the largest Jewish communities in America for that date:

Los Angeles has (a) a Taglit-Birthright Israel Registration Day, (b) a Valley Alliance Thank You Phone Session, and (c) a Maimonides Academy Back to School Night. While I support the latter given that I have grandchildren attending the school, it is a bit disappointing to see nothing on the calendar dealing with what will face us in New York.

Chicago has scheduled (a) a Chaverim: Social Skills for Orthodox Children session, (b) a Kid Connect-Making & Keeping Friends workshop, (c) a class entitled Is Entrepreneurship Right for You, (d) and another on Banking on success as well as a (e) Rosh Hashanah Boot Camp. All, of course are very important activities but, once again, nothing about the threat to our long term existence here.

Miami has scheduled (a) a CAJE Board of Directors Retreat, (b) a Network Stand-up for Service Rush Hour & Volunteer Fair, and the (c) B'nai Zion Foundation Tribute Dinner.

New York, interestingly enough, has nothing on the schedule for the 13th but, in a bow to a positive future will hold a Bagels & Stocks Accountants Division breakfast on the 14th.

Of course if you go to the Christians United for Israel website you will find Nights to Honor Israel scheduled for September 12th in Roswell, NM, September 13th in Las Cruces, NM and September 14th in Spring Valley, CA. Thank the Lord for CUFI.

Am I missing something here? Does nobody there get it? Is nobody upset not only about the potential negative aspects of the vote but also about the arrival once again of the President of Iran who just this week again stated at a “Jerusalem Day” rally in Tehran that Israel must be eradicated from the face of the earth? His rants remind me of Cato the Elder’s constant refrain at the end of every one of his speeches in the Roman Senate when he said “Carthage must be destroyed!”

Former US Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, in a landmark case said "The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a clear and present danger that they will bring about the substantive evils that the United States Congress has a right to prevent. It is a question of proximity and degree.”

The words we are hearing today from the Palestinian Arab leadership, from Hamas, from Iran, from Hezbollah, themselves create the clear and present danger defined by Justice Holmes. Our failure to acknowledge this and take demonstrative action flies in the face of both logic and self-preservation. On September 13th in New York the friends of Israel need to be on the barricades, big time, in order to subvert the clear and present danger now before us. There is no other choice.

2011-08-25T07:05:00.001-07:00

19 Days to Go – Glen Beck in Israel

By Sherwin Pomerantz

The march to the edge of the cliff by the Palestinian Arab leadership to the opening of the 66th Regular Session of the UN General Assembly and the vote to unilaterally establish a Palestinian state continues unabated even though there are moderate voices within who are vocal about their sense that this is not in the best interests of that community at this time. Sad that no one can figure how to put a ladder against the tree that will be tall enough to permit Abbas to descend to firm ground.

Here in Israel on Wednesday, Glen Beck held the last of his three “Restoring Courage” events, this one at the southern wall excavations near the Temple Mount at what is now known as the Davidson Center. There were barely 1,000 people in attendance (less than was expected) although an additional several thousand were watching the event on large screens set up in City Hall Plaza where tickets of admission were not required.

This majority (but not all) of the op-eds in this morning’s papers here were, for the most part, critical of the events in general, critical of his holding this particular program at a Jewish holy site (some saying it was a desecration of the place), and critical of his even being here for these events as some perceive his commitment to Israel and stated love of the Jewish people is nothing but traditional Christian anti-Semitism dressed up in different clothes, but now much more palatable to those of us who are, indeed, historical Jews.

I was not at either place, just as I was no longer in the room when he spoke at the Christians United for Israel Night to Honor Israel in Washington in July (he was the last speaker on the program so it was easy for me to exit). I did not participate in those events because I am not sure of his motives, have some discomfort with his statements in the not too distant past that were less than wise, if not foolhardy, nor can I vouch for his sincerity. But I am grateful that he came here along with thousands of supporters from the US and other countries with a message of love and support for Israel and the Jewish people.

For the naysayers who claim we do not need the support of people like him and caution us about who we choose for friends, I would feel more comfortable not having to depend on the Glen Becks of the world for support if I and millions of others here like me felt that our natural partners were with us. But, truth be told, that is simply not the case. Europe can certainly not be depended upon to support our cause, the US does so grudgingly (recall the difficulty Susan Rice, the US Ambassador to the UN, had in raising her hand to veto a resolution condemning Israeli settlements last February and her immediate explanation that this should not be seen as support for Israel), and, quite frankly we here are not seeing any great public outpouring of support from the Jewish community in the US either.

Taking all of this into account if 50 million US Christians who consider themselves Evangelicals are prepared to express their vocal support for Israel, to lobby their congressional representatives on our behalf, to rally in support of Israel and express their love for this country and the Jewish people, and for some of them to travel here at great expense to put their money where their mouths are, then in this period of time where we here feel ourselves becoming more isolated every day, I for one will accept that support gladly and worry about their long term intentions later.

Abe Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, said Tuesday that Beck has come to Israel to show support and solidarity with Israel and he should be welcomed as a friend. He added that the fact that Beck expressed views people did not agree with was no reason to ostracize him.

Foxman is right and we need to remember this important concept embedded so deeply in our tradition. All of us have friends and if they are good friends, sometimes we disagree with them but we remain friends. It is always possible that we will find out differently sometime in the future, it has happened before. But Beck’s message, as elucidated on Wednesday that “Evil is counting on us to do nothing, that evil is counting on us to be afraid but that evil has misjudged us” is an important concept to remember and act on, even it was uttered by Beck.

Martin Luther King, to whom a fitting memorial will finally be dedicated this coming Sunday in Washington, said “In the end we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.” So even if Beck turns out not to be such a friend, we will more clearly remember those who said they were friends but remained silent.

2011-08-24T05:55:00.000-07:00

20 Days to Go – Levity in the Face of Danger!

By Sherwin Pomerantz

The clock continues to tick with now just 20 days to the opening of the 66th Regular Session of the UN General Assembly and the vote to grant Palestinians statehood, for which, for sure, they are not ready in any event.

In Israel, of course, in addition to the concern about September there’s always something else going on as well. On Friday of last week, the Jerusalem Light Rail System, which has been under construction for the better part of ten years, finally began operating with passengers. Of course, even ten years was not long enough to get all the kinks out of the system. Only 20% of the sensors which will permit giving the trains right of way over automobile traffic have actually been installed, the automated ticketing system is not working (which is why people are being allowed to ride free) and, because of the signalling problems, the maximum allowable speed is 25 mph (40 kph). That means that the 13km (7 mi) end-to-end run which is supposed to take 42 minutes actually takes an hour and 15 minutes but, who cares right?

Of course even under these very restricted conditions the US Consulate in Jerusalem could not help itself and had to issue the following advisory early this morning:

"The U.S. Consulate General in Jerusalem advises U.S. citizens that the light rail system in Jerusalem has now started operations in the city. This new form of transportation is part of the public transportation network. Official U.S. Government personnel are currently prohibited from utilizing public transportation facilities, including municipal buses and the light rail network. The Consulate General will monitor the performance and security climate of the new light rail system as it begins operations."

"U.S. citizens in Jerusalem are encouraged to exercise caution and take appropriate measures to ensure their safety and security, and to report any suspicious or unusual activity immediately to Israeli authorities. U.S. citizens should, as always, maintain a low profile in public."

Can you believe? Of course I took all this to heart and now when I walk the streets of this city I make sure I hug the building walls closely trying to maintain a low profile which is a real challenge for someone 6’-3” tall and heavy but I do my best. And I will definitely stay off the light rail given the US Consulate’s warning.

But there is really nothing to worry about. Gil Troy, Professor of History at McGill University and a Shalom Hartman Research Fellow in Jerusalem, whose writing I highly respect, tells us in an op-ed in this morning’s Jerusalem Post:

"We should stop dreading this fall. The calendar is our friend. For each of the five weeks starting with Sunday August 28, Zionist activists and educators should pick a theme or two – conceptualizing the conversation about Israel as a double helix linking education and advocacy, the purely positive and the necessarily defensive, the aspirational with the historical. We should affirm Zionism’s continuing relevance and power for Jews today, along with Israel’s continuing search for peace. The advocacy piece should link Palestinians’ destructive – and self-destructive - hatred of Israel with the Durban debacle, 9/11-style terrorism, al Qaeda anti-Americanism, and the UN’s corruption– all on full display this coming September."

Well, I cannot disagree with some of the activities he advocates but I certainly do not agree either that the calendar is our friend or that there is nothing to dread this fall. Not since 1973 have the winds blowing in this region been as menacing as they are today with stockpiled armaments pointed at us from at least two directions, a number of our neighbors in the midst of political chaos, and world opinion definitely not on our side.

The challenge that we face is to do our best to continue living normal lives, riding the light rail, walking upright and proud on our streets and believing that we have every right in the world to be here as dictated by the resolution on the topic passed at the San Remo Conference on April 25, 1920. But in parallel, we must also be prepared to deal with the events of the next month which could very well be the catalyst for some very unpleasant occurrences within Israel and on our borders as well. We need not keep a low profile as the Americans have advised people here, but we also should not lull ourselves into a false sense of security should the effects of September turn negative, as well they may.

Si vis pacem, para bellum first uttered by Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus in 5th century Rome and repeated often in our day as If you wish for peace, prepare for war remains relevant. We all hope that whatever the outcome of the General Assembly in September, we will have nothing to dread. But, given past history, the deck is stacked against that and, therefore, we need to be ready, ever vigilant and, in the interim, vocal regarding what we believe is in the best interests of Israel and the Jewish people. This is our job over the next month, nothing less.

2011-08-23T04:45:00.001-07:00

21 Days to Go – Three Weeks Left – Have You Written to the UN?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Three weeks from today, on Wednesday, September 13th at 3 PM Eastern Daylight Time in New York the 66th Regular Session of the UN General Assembly will convene. Have you written to the UN representatives asking them to vote NO or at a minimum, ABSTAIN? And if not, why not? Because you don’t believe it will do any good? Rubbish! Rubbish! Rubbish!

People are moved by public opinion, that’s what pollsters tell us, that’s what politicians know and history has proven that when we have made our voices heard it meant something. God forbid we should remain silent at this important juncture in the history of the Jewish people.

I applaud (and you should as well) the actions of Sen. Robert Menendez (Democrat-New Jersey) and Sen. Marco Rubio (Republican-Florida) who last week sent letters to the Presidents of Colombia, Panama and Costa Rica encouraging them to oppose any resolution that may come before the UN General Assembly seeking to impose a unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state by the UN. They wrote:

"Though it has proven to be an elusive goal, we are confident that long-lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians is achievable and that direct, bilateral negotiations between the sides offer the best hope of realizing it. Therefore, we are deeply concerned about efforts by the Palestinian leadership to seek unilateral recognition of Palestinian statehood during the upcoming meeting of the United Nations General Assembly in New York."

"As you may know, the US Senate recently approved by Unanimous Consent a Resolution declaring that persistence by the Palestinian Authority to circumvent direct negotiations will have implications for continued American aid. Therefore, a unilateral recognition of a Palestinian state at the UN is not in the best interests of the Palestinian people or conducive to the ultimate objective of two democratic states living side by side in peace and security."

For those who are not aware, Menendez is the Chairman and Rubio is the Ranking Member (i.e. highest ranking member of the minority party) of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere. Kudos to them and our gratitude for their putting their money where their mouths are.

Speaking of that, this week I spent about $200 on postage to send individual letters to every UN delegate (copy of the letter attached as well as the list of representatives, once again) urging them to either vote NO or ABSTAIN, as either will be good for us and abstaining may even be better than a no vote, and probably more palatable to many of the delegates. One of the stamps even said “Visit Israel” so it will be interesting to see if the Iranian mission even accepts the mail. Time will tell.

But what are YOU doing about this? Even if you believe it will not help are you willing to take that risk with the lives of those of us who live here and, truth be told, ultimately the lives of westerners living abroad as well? One lesson we have learned in history is that when bad things begin to happen, they may begin with Jews but we are just the litmus test for the evildoers. If they get away with their attempts to discredit us, the rest of the world is the next target.

I accept the fact as some people have pointed out, that some of this is alarmist. But better to sound the alarm for a perceived threat that does not materialize than to keep silent and suffer the consequences.

Elie Wiesel said “Because of indifference, one dies before one actually dies.” I vote for life and hope you do as well!

2011-08-22T06:35:00.000-07:00

22 Days to Go – I Agree - Glenn Beck Gets It!

By Sherwin Pomerantz

On September 13th at 3 PM Eastern Daylight Time in New York the 66th Regular Session of the UN General Assembly will convene….just 22 days from today. Will the leaders assembled there understand what the real issues are that face humanity at this critical time in world history? I’m not sure.

Glenn Beck, the Mormon commentator who has now allied himself with the Christian Evangelical Movement is in Israel this week for three events associated with his “Restoring Courage” project aimed at making the world aware of the perils that face humanity if support for Israel fails. Should we feel good about that or is he just another charlatan pouncing on a hot topic to grab headlines? As for me, I’m happy he is here and grateful for his support.

You can say what you will about his motives, his carelessness with certain words and his sometimes lack of critical research but, in the words of Barry Rubin, Director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Beck “gets it.”

In an op-ed in today’s Jerusalem Post Rubin says that Beck’s common sense, courage, knowing the difference between right and wrong, a willingness to learn and a readiness to admit when one has been wrong has allowed Beck to understand the real truths present in this region and what must be done to address the dangers we must engage. And what does Beck get right? 10 specific points:

1. The main threat in the Middle East is revolutionary Islamism, and the United States must combat it.
2. The problem is not Islam as a religion but revolutionary Islamism as a political ideology that draws on normative Islam to product its own plausible interpretation.
3. The revolutionary Islamist side is winning.
4. The “Arab Spring” contains many dangers.
5. Israel just happens to be largely right and deserves support.
6. One man’s terrorist…is still a terrorist.
7. The Obama administration has messed up the Middle East to a phenomenal extent.
8. One should be fearless in facing intimidation and politically motivated ridicule.
9. We must re-evaluate friends and enemies in this new era of revolutionary Islamism and post-Marxist leftism.
10. Whatever mistakes the United States has made, it is a good country and the hope of the world.

Rubin concludes with the words:

Any criticism one can make of Beck pales in comparison to all of the above points, on which he is quite correct. But then, as Jews, and Israelis most of all, should know, to be falsely reviled in not proof of being wrong or evil.

So, in spite of earlier criticism of Beck by respected members of the American Jewish Community such as ADL National Director Abraham Foxman and this morning’s diatribe against Beck in the Jerusalem Post by Likud right-winger Moshe Feiglin, because Beck “gets it” and he is prepared to put his money where his mouth is, I, for one, welcome his support.

Zev Chafets, who was former Prime Minister Menahem Begin’s Press Secretary writes in today’s Washington Post that in those days Israel was seeing the very beginning of Christian Evangelical support and did not really know how to deal with it. But Chafets recalls that:

"Begin asked his staff how many of these evangelicals there were in the United States. The answer was upward of 20 million. And that settled that. American Jewish leaders, virtually all of whom were (and are) liberal Democrats, were (and remain) scandalized. They argued that evangelical Christians believe that Jews don’t go to heaven and that they will die in some end-of-the-world scenario. Begin – and every subsequent Israeli prime minister of both the left and the right – preferred to let God sort out eternity. Here on Earth, actions speak louder than words."

I agree with that and in this world, where Israel struggles every day to find supporters I am happy to take the support of the now 50 million Evangelical Christians and even the likes of Glen Beck, who proudly proclaim that they not only love Israel they love the Jewish people. As Pastor John Hagee often says, someday he and his Jewish friends will be walking the streets of the old city of Jerusalem and the Messiah will be coming the other way. At that point in time one of them will need to change their theology. Until then we need to be grateful for their support and bless them for it.

2011-08-21T01:31:00.000-07:00

26 Days to Go – And the Rockets’ Red Glare!

By Sherwin Pomerantz

The clock continues to tick now with 26 days to the opening of the UN General Assembly in New York and the proposed vote on the Palestinian Arab’s planned unilateral declaration of statehood.

But here in Israel over the last few days we have buried eight of our citizens killed in the terrorist attack close to the Egyptian border, while another citizen was killed last night as a result of the barrage of 80 rockets from Gaza in the last 60 hours. The only good news is that there were not more casualties, but there probably will be if the rocket attack continues. And why? Because Israel responded to the terror attack which occurred on Thursday by taking out the leadership of the group responsible for the attack, a group that has its headquarters in Gaza.

But, of course, according to the New York Times the terrorists were not terrorists at all, but rather militants, or so the caption on the picture of the event calls them. And what is the difference? The dictionary defines terrorist as “A person who employs terror or terrorism, especially as a political weapon.” The US Department of Defense says “An individual who uses violence, terror and intimidation to achieve a result.” A militant, on the other hand, is defined as “Having a combative character, aggressive, especially in the service of a cause.”

It would seem to this writer, therefore, that while the people who perpetrated this action against non-combatant Israelis were both militants as the definition indicates as well as terrorists. What made them terrorists is that they carried their militancy one step further employing terrorism as a political weapon. Of course it is much more convenient for the western press to see the people who do these things as militants, because then op-ed writers can go to the next step and say that they have become militant because they are oppressed forgetting, of course, that some of the most effective protest movements of the last 100 years shaped by the concept of passive resistance and not the use of terror.

As if this shading of world reportage was not sufficient in light of the events of the last days, Roger Cohen who writes regularly for the New York Times and who is called by them a “globalist,” comes out with an op-ed on Saturday entitled “Jews in a Whisper” which examines why, in public places, when the word “Jew” is uttered it is usually done in a whisper. He supplies a number of personal examples and then includes this interesting paragraph:

"Jewish identity is an interesting subject and quest. In America, because I’ve criticized Israel and particularly its self-defeating expansion of settlements in the West Bank, I was, to self-styled “real Jews,” not Jewish enough, or even – join the club – a self-hating Jew. In Britain I find myself exasperated by the muted, muffled way of being a Jew. Get some pride, an inner voice says, speak up!"

So in a way, we can take heart from his desire to see an increase in Jewish pride until later in the article he gives himself away as someone who, indeed, does not put his lot in with the Jewish people when he says:

"The lesson is clear, Jews, with their history, cannot become the systematic oppressors of another people. They must be vociferous in their insistence that continued colonization of Palestinians in the West Bank will increase Israel’s isolation and ultimately its vulnerability."

The italics are mine and it is in those words that he, like many of our brethren, gives himself away. Instead of saying our history, he says their history; instead of saying We he says They, thus removing himself from the historical narrative and separating himself from the 3,500 year line of Jewish history. In a word, he confirms, whether intentionally or not, that he is not part of the people of whose history he is a modern day product. So perhaps, even as he seemingly objects to the term, he really is a self-hating Jew or, at the very least, certainly not a proud one.

In our continuing quest to get the world to recognize our legitimate right to live here in the national homeland of the Jewish people, we continue to do battle with those who use linguistics to demean us as well as brethren who would prefer to have had the act of birth bequeath unto them a different, less cumbersome identity. After 3,500 years the battle is not nearly over.

2011-08-19T07:47:00.001-07:00

28 Days to Go – Remembering Leaving Gaza.

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Earlier today, 28 days to the opening of the UN General Assembly in New York, Israel buried eight of its citizens, victims of yesterday’s terrorist attack close to the Egyptian border. As I write this the words of the grandfather of Staff Sgt. Moshe Naftali, z’l, killed in the attack still ring in my ears when he said at the funeral on Mt. Herzl here in Jerusalem: “I just want to kiss him one more time.” Should any grandfather, or parent, have to witness this kind of a burial and especially for this reason?

Six years ago this week the State of Israel evacuated 1,700 families from the Gaza Strip in an effort to disengage from that area which contained 1.4 million Palestinian Arabs. The period was one of extreme angst within Israel and the decision by then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon was made even though a referendum on the subject showed that the 65% of the population who voted was against the move. The intent was to bring these families back into “Israel proper” as it were and no longer be involved with regular skirmishes with the Palestinian Arab community in the strip. The hope was that the area would then be run by the local leadership and Israel, having evacuated the region, would have no more political problems with it.

Of course, that was not to be the case. The local population went on a rampage right after Israel finally left the region on September 11th as the last Israeli soldier locked the gate at the Kissufim Crossing behind him and lowered the Israeli flag from its stanchion. The hothouses left by Israeli and purchased for the benefit of the Palestinians by former World Bank President James Wolfensohn were destroyed as was every vestige of the Israeli presence in Gaza. The later election of Hamas and its takeover of the strip then generated an ongoing barrage of rockets into Israel until the advent of Operation Cast Lead in December 2008.

So the withdrawal from the settlements of Gaza did not give Israel any more peace than the withdrawal of our forces from south Lebanon in 2000 under the Premiership of Ehud Barak. Neither border has been quiet and secure and one can only surmise that Israel’s withdrawal for nothing in return ended up being inimical to our long term desire to survive and thrive in this land.

For those who continue to wonder why Israel is so adamant about not granting statehood to the Palestinians except as a result of direct, face-to-face negotiations aimed at declaring an end to the conflict, these two situations should provide sufficient proof of the failure of unilateral action when it comes to Middle East politics.

The question remains: Why doesn’t the world understand this? Or is the world’s seeming support for the proposed UN resolution just the next act in history’s longest running drama dealing with the indestructible Jews? And if so, will there ever be a happy ending as the curtain comes down on the last act? We need to help that along and understand the role each of us personally can play in this drama. Please, write to the UN delegates now and urge them to vote no and do it soon!! History is calling us once again and we dare not be silent.

2011-08-18T08:18:00.001-07:00

29 Days to Go – KABOOM – Do the Palestinians Want a State?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Today the border went KABOOM and with 29 days to the opening of the UN General Assembly in New York and the vote a day or two after that on Palestinian statehood the question must be asked: Do the Palestinians really want a state or is all this just another smokescreen?

Israel Harel in an article in today’s Ha’aretz makes the statement that “If the Palestinians knew their bid for UN recognition would lead to the establishment of a state in the 1967 borders, they wouldn’t make it. Rather their application is meant to serve their strategy of delay, which has many stages and stratagems.”

In the context of that theory, at noon today Israel time armed gunmen stationed at the border between Israel and Egypt near the southern port city of Eilat fired on an Egged bus traveling the road on the Israel side following which there were additional attacks on other Israeli vehicles as well. Seven people are now dead and at least 26 were wounded from an unprovoked, terror attack on Israeli citizens going to their homes for the weekend. As I write this at 5:40 PM Thursday afternoon, the story is still developing so information is somewhat sketchy but everyone does agree that this is yet another terror attack aimed at the citizens of Israel.

While it is not yet clear who the terrorists were, one thing we know for certain. These were people who were not in favor of any sort of peace with Israel or an eventual two state solution to end the conflict. If that were not the case, there would be no reason to engage in terror. There never has been any reason to engage in terror other than to derail whatever chance might exist for normalization of life in this part of the world.

One can only conclude that in reality, there really is no desire on the part of the Palestinian Arab leadership for the creation of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. If one looks at the history going back to the generous offer made by former Prime Minister Ehud Barak at Camp David in 2000, or even the amendments proposed later by Israeli peaceniks such as Yossi Beilin, followed by the extensive discussions between former Prime Minister Olmert and Chairman Abbas, it becomes painfully obvious that the Palestinian Arab leadership had multiple opportunities to end the conflict and move on to a Palestine within the same parameters that they are now demanding at the UN. But they did not take them then and, sad as it is for me to admit, they will not take them now or probably anytime in the future.

One can only conclude that the real goal of the Palestinian Arab leadership is to put an end to the enterprise called Israel and to wait, delay, and posture for as long as it takes to get to that goal. The move to get the UN General Assembly to vote for Palestinian statehood then becomes just one more event in the process. What will happen the day after regardless of how the vote goes? No one knows for sure but the possible scenarios include, but are not limited to:

• Massive demonstrations in Judea and Samaria (i.e. the West Bank) as well as Gaza against Israel (and, of course, the US as well if it goes ahead with its Security Council veto) either because the vote was “no” or the vote was “yes” and Israel has not immediately left the settlements.
• Demonstrations that then turn violent even though the Palestinian Arab leadership claims that they will prevent violence, although history shows that these always turn violent.
• The possibility that this will lead to a third uprising (or, as they tend to call it: intifada).
• Nationalist elements in Israel convince the government to annex the settlement blocs and claim that they are now officially part of Israel causing widespread violent demonstrations.

The list is endless of course, only limited by one’s imagination. In a word, as Harel said in his article “Because Israel cannot be destroyed by force, as both conventional and non-conventional wars and terrorist wars have proved, they have embarked on a different sort of campaign: a global campaign (aided by more than a few Jews both in Israel and abroad) to undermine the Jewish people’s right to sovereignty in its homeland. Meanwhile, they are avoiding all negotiations until this goal is achieved.”

While I have been advocating for some months that the UN should vote “no” on statehood in September, perhaps, just perhaps, the better alternative would be for all the delegates to abstain, which is, officially, a refusal to vote. At least that way the world can effectively throw the problem back in the laps of the two parties involved and say “you deal with it” and the Palestinians can’t blame any single country for their disappointment.

Hearst journalist Ambrose Gwinnett Pierce, who died in 1913, once said, succinctly “When you doubt, abstain.” Good advice to the world on this sad day for so many families in Israel, yet again.

2011-08-16T06:42:00.001-07:00

31 Days to Go – Will You Demonstrate?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

The clock is ticking and there are now 31 days before the opening of the UN General Assembly in New York and the vote a day or two after that on Palestinian statehood.

One of my readers has raised the question of whether or not there are demonstrations planned for New York during the period of the General Assembly against the drive for statehood by the Palestinian Arab leadership? A search of the web turned up nothing although I hope that will not really be the case as the date draws closer.

Do you remember December 6, 1987? That was the Sunday when over 250,000 people descended on Washington from all parts of the United States to demonstrate on behalf of Soviet Jewry. It was, at the time, the largest outpouring of support for that movement and was timed to occur a day before Gorbachev and Reagan were scheduled to meet in the nation’s capital. The organizers never expected that more than 150,000 people would participate in the middle of winter, yet representatives of over 300 community groups in the US braved the cold and made their voices known, insuring that the issue of human rights in the Soviet Union would be placed on Reagan’s “front burner.”

The members of the American community who care about values and the respect for the right of those of us living here to live fruitful lives in the national homeland of the Jewish people need to do as much this year as well.

Many of you know that fully 20% of the US Congress will have visited Israel this month. I won’t deal here with the propriety of legislators leaving their desks when the country is in so much economic turmoil, as others smarter than me have spoken about this. But they are here nonetheless and last week, at a meeting in Ramallah with Mahmoud Abbas he shared with the visiting legislators his vision of a Palestinian state, and it was not pretty.

His main point was that if he succeeds in creating an independent Palestinian state it will have no Jewish settlements. In his zeal to achieve ethnic cleansing of Jews presently living in Judea and Samaria, he is speaking about the eviction of over 500,000 Jews from everywhere over the “green line” including Jerusalem neighborhoods such as Ramot, Gilo, Ramat Shlomo and, of course, the large settlement blocs of Gush Etzion, Ma’ale Adumim and Ariel. After that he added that if multinational forces were to enforce a future peace, those forces could also not contain any Israelis, whether they lived in Israel or abroad (a bit of moderation over his earlier statement that they could not contain any Jews).

So the message is clear. The simple fact that Jews might live in a Palestinian state is a humiliating thing for the Palestinians. Of course, if the shoe were on the other foot and we said that after a peace treaty no Arabs would be allowed to live in Israel the world would become one ball of fire with anti-Israel demonstrations everywhere. We dare not blind ourselves to the possibility that the real desire of the Palestinian Arab leadership is not to make peace with Israel but to see to our ultimate expulsion from this part of the world.

While I do not believe, and certainly hope, that this will not happen vigilance is critical. So thinking Americans, Jews and non-Jews, should be on the barricades in New York in mid-September to make it clear to the UN and the world that the intransigence of the Palestinian Arab leadership in not being willing to even come to the negotiating table, will not be rewarded by a declaration of statehood one of whose aims is to make the resultant country Judenrein!!
There must be a demonstration that will make Washington in December 1987 look like amateur night.

Edmund Burke was right when he said “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” We need to internalize that lesson.

2011-08-15T09:06:00.001-07:00

32 Days to Go – See What the Other Side Thinks!

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 32 days before the opening of the UN General Assembly in New York and the vote after that on Palestinian statehood does anyone ever wonder what the Palestinian man and woman on the street is thinking?

Well, if you look at Twitter excerpts from the Palestinian community, they are, to say the least, instructive.

Some examples:

• Araberican: It's enough all the other Arab govs are anti-Palestinian. We don't need an anti-Palestinian Palestinian gov!
• Nnoaf_e: Dissolve the PA so we can start talking about Palestine again rather than negotiating a halt in building settlements and because they're just as much of a barrier for Palestine as that Zionist apartheid Wall is!
• Earthtonadine: Dissolve the PA because Mahmoud Abbas is an idiot. Palestinians and Palestine can do SO much better than him.
• LinahAlsaafin: Dissolve the PA for suppressing freedom of speech and for jailing anyone (journalists) speaking out against them
• Budouroddick: Dissolve the PA so our sons and daughters won't have to hang their heads in shame when asked about Palestinian leaders.

So it seems that the people who make up the population ruled by the Palestinian Arab leadership are not so enamored of their top guns and see them as just as much an obstacle to independence and statehood as their concern about the “occupation” and living side by side with Israel

But the Palestinian Arab leadership, immune to the concerns of their own people, remains intent on going to New York and pressing for the UN vote. And, of course, they continue to spout the “Judenrein” concept of statehood with Chairman Abbas coming out once again today with the statement that the newly designated Palestine will not have any Jews living in it. After which he added that while he is in favor of international forces maintaining security after statehood, those forces cannot have any Israelis in them, whether they live in Israel or abroad. Well, he has tempered that a bit as a few weeks ago he said those forces cannot have any Jews in them. Are there no liberals left in the world who are bothered by these kinds of statements? One wonders!

Of course, when Abbas and his henchmen get to the US they will no doubt be happy to attend the Durban III Conference on Racism scheduled to be held just before the opening of the UN session which will, once again, be a forum for Israel bashing as it was in Durban I and II. At Durban II the President of Iran was one of the keynote speakers and you can bet that his speech was not one of reconciliation with Israel or the west. But a counter-demonstration is planned for Wednesday, September 21st at Dag Hammarskjold Plaza across from the UN headquarters. Hopefully those people who value tolerance and religious freedom will show up in force in a statement of solidarity against the forces of evil in the world.

So, while the world’s attention is focused on the steady stream of news coming out of Israel, little more than lip service is being paid to the more than 1,000 Syrian civilians who have been killed by the Alawite regime or the fact that once again thousands in Somalia seem to be on the verge of starvation. Talk about misplaced priorities.

But I close once again urging my readers to contact the UN delegates so that they can hear from those of us who care that the path to peace in this region is not through the UN but through direct negotiations between the parties concerned. Losing the vote at the UN will, hopefully, force the Palestinian leadership back to the negotiating table whether or not Israel continues to build for the natural growth of the large settlement blocs in Judea and Samaria.

2011-08-14T05:59:00.000-07:00

33 Days to Go – Don’t Believe Everything You Read!

By Sherwin Pomerantz

The numbers are getting smaller and we now have 33 days to go to the opening of the UN General Assembly and the vote after that on Palestinian statehood.

The Palestinian Arab leadership has now reaffirmed its intent to move forward with this project in spite of serious concerns in a great many corners of the world about the efficacy of the move and whether it has real benefit to their cause. But what has struck me this past week in the run-up to the “Days of September” is how news from this part of the world is being reported in the world press.

Take for example the Government of Israel’s announcement last week that it had authorized the construction of 1,600 new “homes” (actually condos in western terms) in Ramat Shlomo and 950 new apartments in Har Homa. Well, it did not take any time at all for (a) the Palestinian Arab leadership to immediately call for a stop to Israel’s unilateral decision to construct additional homes in East Jerusalem, (b) for the US Secretary of State to, once again, say that Israel’s building in East Jerusalem is an obstacle to peace and (c) for EU Foreign Policy Chief Catherine Ashton to express her “deep regret” over Israel’s decision to build in Ramat Shlomo.

But one needs to look behind the story to really figure out what this is all about. The community of Ramat Shlomo is ½ km from my office where I am writing this blog. The tech park in which our office is situated is just inside the 1949 (not the 1967) armistice lines while the Ramat Shlomo neighborhood is just on the other side of the line. It is located just east of Ramot which is also, for the most part, just over the 1949 armistice lines. Started in 1995 to handle the growing ultra-orthodox population situated on the north side of the city, Ramat Shlomo today has about 2,200 families (i.e. 16,000 people). This is a neighborhood whose natural growth is high and the 1,600 new units were originally authorized in March 2010 and will probably not be completed for another couple of years. The area itself is certainly an integral part of the City of Jerusalem, whether or not the rest of the world recognizes this.

Har Homa, located south of the city, is also just over the armistice line facing Bethlehem and was conceived to contain 8,200 housing units although, at the present time, less than half of those have been built. The community is mixed religious and secular and was opened to accommodate the growing population on the south side of Jerusalem.

In the earlier negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Arab leadership it was always understood that the large settlement blocs would remain in Israeli hands if a peace agreement was ever reached. So the suburbs of Jerusalem such as Ramot, Ramat Shlomo, Har Homa, and Gilo were always acknowledged by both sides to remain within Israel under any peace agreement, just as would Ma’ale Adumim, the Gush Etzion bloc and Ariel. However, when US President Obama said 18 months ago that Israel must stop building in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, he gave a gift to the Palestinians that they themselves did not expect. Once Obama said that the Palestinian Arab leadership had no choice but to be at least as Palestinian as Obama.

In this hyperactive political period, in which we now find ourselves, all of the earlier agreements and understandings, including the famous letter on the topic that former president Bush gave to Ariel Sharon acknowledging the US understanding of these facts, have been forgotten and now every square centimeter of land outside the 1949 armistice lines has become part of the “settlements.” Therefore, the way the non-Israeli world looks as things, all of this building is an obstacle to peace while the unwillingness of the Palestinian side to come to the table during the 10 month construction free in 2010 is totally overlooked.

Of course the news articles generally cover only the objections of the other side, the EU and the US and rarely give space to the remarks from the Israeli side. So, for example, in an August 12th article in the New York Times by Rick Gladstone, he waited until paragraph 12 of a 12 paragraph article to include the statement that “Israel has argued that any two-state solution with the Palestinians will involve holding on to areas like Ramat Shlomo, so that in its view, building there for its citizens should not affect talks.” So much for fair and balanced reporting.

It is in this spirit that Israel goes to the UN in September to object to the unilateral move by the Palestinians to get General Assembly approval for statehood. In the opinion of many jurists the Palestinians, by going unilaterally to the UN are in direct violation of the Oslo Agreement which states in Para V:4 “The two parties agree that the outcome of the permanent status negotiations should not be prejudiced or pre-empted by agreements reached for the interim period.” Similar language was contained, as well, in every additional agreement signed by the parties so going to the UN instead of sitting down and negotiating an end to the conflict with Israel is, by all accounts, in violation of agreement the Palestinians have signed with Israel. So what else is new eh? (Have you written those letters yet to the UN delegates?)

2011-08-11T01:45:00.001-07:00

36 Days to Go – Time to Act – Do it NOW!

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 36 days to go to the opening of the UN General Assembly and the vote on Palestinian statehood this is our chance to be heard and to make it known to those who will vote how we feel on the issue.

For some months now I have been urging my readers to write letters to the UN delegates voicing their opinion and now is the time to do so. Following is the text of the letter I have sent today to all of the delegates:

===============================================================================

H.E. Mr. Zahir Tanin
Ambassador of Afghanistan to the UN
633 3rd Ave., 27th Fl.
New York NY 10017

Your Excellency,

I am writing to you as an Israeli citizen urging you to vote NO on the issue of Palestinian statehood if it comes up at the UN General Assembly in September.

You should know that the overwhelming majority of my countrymen desire peace with our Palestinian neighbors, are prepared to make serious sacrifices to achieve that peace and, like them, want our children and grandchildren to be able to live successful and fulfilling lives without the need to go to war in every generation.

We would welcome the opportunity, in the framework of true and lasting peace and an end to the conflict, to work with our neighbors to continue to build what we have begun here over the last 63 years, a knowledge-based society with sufficient economic stability to weather any economic downturn.

But such peace can only come when and if the two parties are prepared to sit down together and discuss all of the issues, without preconditions and without the interference of outside forces. As such, a vote at the UN General Assembly to recognize Palestinian statehood is simply counter-productive and runs the risk of unleashing forces here, on both sides, that could be both uncontrollable and detrimental to achieving what we all want.

As such, I urge you to vote NO and give a message to all of us here that the UN is only prepared to move in this direction once the parties involved have settled their differences and announced an end to the conflict.

Thank you for reading this letter and I hope you will be moved to act accordingly for the good and welfare of all of us who live here.

Sincerely yours,

===============================================================================

I urge everyone to do something similar using your own language of course. Once again I am attaching the list of delegates and their addresses.

There will come a time at the end of each of our days when, according to tradition, we will be asked to make an accounting of our deeds, good and bad. We dare not run the risk of saying that when the chips were down, when our people needed us, we remained silent. I have no guarantee that any of this will do any good but just in case it will be helpful, we dare not remain mute!!! If you care, take the time, make the effort, do it now!

2011-08-10T05:56:00.001-07:00

37 Days to Go – Don’t Bank on the UN Leadership

By Sherwin Pomerantz

The countdown continues and there are now 37 days to go to the opening of the UN General Assembly and the vote on Palestinian statehood.

When looking ahead to September there are two people whose names you should know but my guess is you have never heard of them. One is Nawaf Salam and the other is Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser. Now you probably don’t recognize these people and they are certainly not the names of any people who are likely to live next door to most of my readers but they may very well become key players in the drama that will be played out in New York next month.

Nawaf Salam is the Lebanese Ambassador to the UN and at the end of this month he will take over as President of the UN Security Council for the month of September. A well-educated Lebanese native he holds a doctorate in Political Science from the Institut d’Etudes Politiques de Paris, an LLM from Harvard Law School and a doctorate in History from the Sorbonne. Now one would think that if there has to be an Arab conducting Security Council meetings in September that someone with his background would be the best of the best in the pursuit of fair and balanced debate. Yet, let’s look at some of his recent statements.

On the debate last week on increasing sanctions on Syria, Salam said: “Lebanon decided to disassociate itself from the council statement condemning violence in Syria,” a position slammed as shocking by Lebanon’s Future Movement lawmaker Ahmed Fatfat. In a debate on Israel on December 19, 2008, Salam said:

"Continued settlement activity (by Israel) is illegal anywhere in the occupied territories and is an obstacle to peace…. Israel must immediately dismantle all settlement outposts and freeze all future building in the occupied territories including Jerusalem…. Israel continues to subject Gaza to an immoral and illegal siege."

So not sure how much neutral adjudication of the upcoming meeting we will get from this source.

Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser is the Ambassador of Qatar and he is the President of the 61st General Assembly which will convene in September in New York. He holds a degree in law from Beirut Arab University and has been at the UN since September 1998. Prior to that he was the Ambassador to Jordan and was previously at the UN Mission as minister to that mission. He also served in Pakistan and Dubai. He is also an advisory member of NYU’s Center for Dialogues.

While it is almost impossible to find any record of significant remarks made by the Qatari ambassador, one of his first tasks will be to preside over Durban III just before the UN General Assembly convenes. What is instructive is to view the remarks of the head of Qatar’s delegation to the first Durban conference, Abdul-Rahman H. Al-Attiyah when he declared “all the Israeli heinous violations are justified as a means to bring back every Jew to a land that they raped from its legitimate owners and denied their right to claim it back.” So we know where the Ambassador is coming from on that issue.

Al-Nasser will, as well, probably reflect his emir’s current agenda. During the opening days of the General Assembly in September of last year, Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani said “The war on terror…has plunged us into a kind of war with no limits, nor end, nor logic, nor legal or moral conditions…We believe that even as the phenomenon of terrorist exists, it should not be treated by waging wars…To the contrary it has…undermined the efforts made in dialogue among cultures.”

And by the way, if the President cannot chair a particular meeting, he can turn the gavel over to one of his vice-presidents of whom one is Iran’s UN Ambassador, Mohammad Khazael, who in an earlier interview cited the “important issue” of the “Durban Conference focusing on racial discrimination.”

So September will also be interesting as Israel pleads its case before arbiters who are among the least friendly nations of the world to put it mildly.

Someone once said “We will remember not the names of our enemies but the silence of our friends.” It will be an interesting month to be sure as we find out who are friends really are, and we must continue our efforts to convince the delegates to the UN to vote NO on a unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood.

2011-08-09T05:10:00.001-07:00

38 Days to Go – Diversions in Israel

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 38 days to go to the opening of the UN General Assembly and the vote on Palestinian statehood our government here has now had its attention diverted to domestic issues.

Over the last three weeks there have been growing street demonstrations against the high cost of living in Israel. That includes everything from housing, to fuel, electricity prices, food prices, day care, education, and…well the list is endless. It seems now that there is not a single issue in the life of human beings here that does not have its specific group protesting about the costs related to that issue. From a small group in Tel Aviv three weeks ago the size of the demonstrators grew to over 300,000 by last Saturday night with a promise of over 500,000 this coming weekend, spread over any number of cities across the country with even some sympathizers setting up tents in the US as well.

To be sure the cost of living in Israel is extremely high as compared to other western and OECD countries. For example, even though housing prices have tanked around the world over the last two years, in Israel they have seen a steady increase of 10-20% annually. Fuel is now over $8 a gallon (to use the US reference), spare parts for cars cost 4-20 times what they do in the west, and it costs Israelis who commute on public transportation from Herzlia to Tel Aviv (about 6 miles) double what it costs someone in New York City to get from any point A to point B via subway or bus.

So the demonstrators have a point although it seems to this writer that both they and the government are missing the boat as the voices of protest grow and the government seems not to know how to handle them.

As far as the demonstrators are concerned, I support them in principle. The cost of living here has spun out of control for a whole host of reasons, some related to the move from socialism to capitalism a generation ago and others to the fact that in so many areas vendors have monopolies (e.g. there is only one cement manufacturer in the country and for any one brand of automobile, only one dealer, albeit with many branches).

But the protesters are fooling themselves if they think that the government can simply decide to create economic equality in one fell swoop without bankrupting the country. So, instead of demanding adjustments to every one of the economic sectors in need of addressing, they should really put together a plan to assist the government to address the country’s social needs over a reasonable period of time and I have faith that they can do so. After all, as many people are quick to point out, a very large majority of these (mostly) young people are intelligent, well-educated and creative types who, if they exerted as much energy in developing a plan as they have in organizing the demonstrations, they could actually come up with something worthwhile and effective.

Of course, the government does not stand blameless either. One good example is the way that the Prime Minister has responded to the uproar. Almost four weeks into the cycle he has neither met with any of these demonstrators, nor addressed the nation with his plan for dealing with the concerns they have raised. Instead he has empanelled a committee to make suggestions for reform, a committee that contains no less than 12 government ministers and a host of other parties as well. As we all know, a committee that large has almost no chance of doing anything constructive and certainly not in the short run. Concomitantly his Knesset associates pushed through a housing bill that they claim will assist in alleviating the problem, even though the protestors and many others in the country see no chance of that really doing any good unless and until the Israel Lands Authority starts releasing large tracts of land for development.

Some people are claiming that the only solution is to abandon capitalism and go back to a socialist economy, even though it is difficult to point to one example of pure socialism that has served any nation well. Where the government has failed, in the transition from the socialism of the 70s (when there was high unemployment, rampant inflation, and life, in general was not so good) to a capitalist economy, is in not providing the means for people to benefit from capitalism.

For example, one can argue that not everyone can or should be able to afford to live in the center of Tel Aviv. Rather, people should be willing to live 20, 30 or 40 miles out of town where there is more affordable housing. However, in order to make that argument the government has an obligation to build a transportation infrastructure that enables people to get from their homes to their work places in a reasonable amount of time, and this was not done. As of today there is no intra-city rapid transit network anywhere in Israel and commuter trains, which were also late in developing, only serve a limited percentage of the population.

As for housing, the main reason that housing costs have skyrocketed is because there is a shortage of housing in the country. To alleviate that shortage, the government, which owns 95% of the land, needs to release that land for building and put certain controls in place to ensure that there will be pockets of affordable housing not affected by the willingness of overseas buyers to purchase second homes in Israel at inflated prices. Similarly, as a large percentage of the protestors are students, universities should be building high rise dormitories so that students do not have to consider living in expensive central Tel Aviv if they choose to go to school in that city.

As we have seen in the last few years, it is not capitalism per se that is a bad thing, it is the greed that drives certain capitalists to deal with today without worrying about tomorrow. Couple that with the lack of serious long term planning by every government we have ever had, and one has a recipe for socioeconomic disaster.

So the attention of the government has been temporarily diverted from the most important issues that speak to our survival here, the long term relationship with our neighbors and the very real threat of a nuclear Iran. Of course, the government was not doing so well attending to those issues before the protests started so, at the end of the day, maybe it doesn’t matter anyway.

We read earlier today in the service for the 9th of Av (Tisha B’av) the verse from Isaiah 46:4 which says “Even to your old age and gray hairs I am he, I am he who will sustain you. I have made you and I will carry you; I will sustain you and I will rescue you.” Let’s hope so because we are not doing so well in dealing with these issues on our own.

2011-08-08T06:04:00.000-07:00

39 Days to Go – Is Anybody Listening?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

The clock is ticking and there are now just 39 days to go to the opening of the UN General Assembly and the vote on Palestinian statehood.

Here in Israel the Palestinian Arab leadership seems intent not only in going all the way with this (even though they surely understand that this will cause more problems than it solves) but also in urging their people here not to react violently after the vote, whichever way it goes.

Is there a way to avoid a worst case scenario? Well, for a change I actually agree with a New York Times editorial which appeared yesterday and which said:

"The best way, likely the only way, to head off this debacle is with the start of serious negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. The two sides haven’t even been in the same room together since September 2010. "

Uncharacteristically for the New York Times, they lay the blame at the feet of both parties as opposed to their usual position of criticizing Israel alone. They also refrained from urging third party intervention here (although they do give credit to the continuing efforts of the Quartet to come up with some formula that will be accepted by all), which is also a departure from the norm, perhaps realizing at long last that only the parties to the conflict themselves can craft a solution, if there is one.

To reiterate a position that I have taken earlier, the ONLY way this situation will EVER get resolved (if it can be resolved, and there are those who believe we need to live in a perpetual state of war to survive) is if the two parties sit down together, without outside interference, and hammer together a plan that makes sense for both parties. Because I retain an American mentality even after 28 years here, I believe this can yet be done and deplore the fact that neither party seems to be willing to come to the table and work on this.

The Palestinians have created every excuse in the book not to do so and Netanyahu’s reluctance to meet the Palestinian Arab leadership without having them first agree to calling Israel the nation state of the Jewish people (which it is) is no less stultifying. Earlier last week the Bronfman’s urged Netanyahu to go to Ramallah and speak to the Palestinian National Council (something I suggested in my blog months ago) but my guess is he will continue to dismiss that suggestion.

So we are left with a very difficult and, of course, serious situation compounded by what is now going on in the world’s financial markets and the demonstrations here in the Israel Spring as it were. As for me, I continue to share the same frustration I have always shared living here. We are really smart people who know how to do things better than we oftentimes demonstrate and I will never fully understand why. But that is endemic to the society, I would even say it is part of the local DNA and it makes true progress in certain areas such as peace most elusive.

Tonight, the 9th of the Hebrew month of Av, here in Israel and around the world, the Jewish community will pause for 24 hours to commemorate the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem over 2,000 years ago. It is a period of fasting, prayer, engaging discussions on related topics and general mourning, akin to that of Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement) but much different. In addition to the Temple remembrance, this was also the day which marked the Jewish expulsion from Spain in 1492, from the Warsaw Ghetto in 1942, from England in 1290 and the start of the Crusades in 1095 which resulted in the death of 10,000 Jews in the first 30 days after that date. So we have reason to mark the calendar tomorrow in a special way.

But the message of this day is not only about remembrance, it is also about hope and the possibility of breaking the cycle of mourning that has too often enveloped the Jewish people. To do that, national leaders must know when to stand firm and when and how to bend to avoid disastrous results. They must be able to put their personal agenda and feelings aside and make proper decisions for the long term welfare of their people. Is anybody listening?

2011-08-05T05:38:00.000-07:00

42 Days to Go – What State Can the UN Approve?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 42 days to go to the opening of the UN General Assembly and the vote on Palestinian statehood it is now more important than ever to let the UN delegates know saying YES would be a big mistake.

Steven Rosen in Foreign Policy magazine writes an analysis of the Palestinian state that the leadership there is attempting to get the General Assembly to approve that is the best I’ve seen on why this should not happen.

In a piece entitled The Palestinians' Imaginary State, Rosen poses the question: Which Palestinian State? He posits:

"Of the three Palestinian states the assembly could recognize, two are real and arguably could meet the requirements for statehood. But it is the third, purely imaginary one that the assembly will endorse, one that neither has a functioning government nor meets the requirements of international law. Both the Hamas-controlled Palestinian entity in Gaza and the rival Fatah-governed Palestinian entity in the West Bank can be said to meet all four of the criteria of the law of statehood. The one on which the United Nations will vote does not."

He makes a good argument when he says:

"Unlike the two Palestinian entities that already exist, either of which could be recognized as a Palestinian state because they seem to fulfill the legal requirements, the Palestinian entity that a General Assembly majority will recognize as a state this September does not actually exist on Earth. It is imaginary and aspirational, not real. And it does not meet the legal requirements."

His case is strengthened by the fact that Mahmoud Abbas, who claims to be the president of the Palestine that is pressing the claim in the U.N. General Assembly, is not considered to be the president anymore by Hamas, the largest political party in the putative state. Elected in 2005 to serve until January 2009, his term expired, even though he unilaterally extended it.

This putative state of "Palestine" also has a legislature that never meets. Elected on Jan. 25, 2006, for a term of four years, the PLC has enacted no laws, passed on no ministers, and conducted no meetings since 2007. It is common for Palestinian observers and their supporters in the West to attribute the PLC's inaction to the fact that Israel arrested 21 of its more radical members in June 2006 after the abduction of Gilad Shalit, most of who are still in detention. The Carter Center, for example, states, "With most of its representatives in Israeli prisons, the Palestinian Legislative Council never assembled the required quorum for meetings and hence was unable to carry out legislative functions designated to the PLC." But the PLC has 132 members, of whom fewer than 20 are detained by Israel, and a quorum of the PLC requires only one more than half the members -- 67 -- to be present. So it is not Israel that is preventing a quorum.

In a word if the General Assembly votes yes it will create an imaginary state that has two incompatible presidents, two rival prime ministers, a constitution whose most central provisions are violated by both sides, no functioning legislature, no ability to hold elections, a population mostly not under its control, borders that would annex territory under the control of other powers, and no clear path to resolve any of these conflicts. It is a resolution that plants the seeds for civil and international wars, not one that advances peace.

Of course, should the U.S. exercises its veto on this issue in the Security Council, Abbas can consort with Rostam Ghasemi, who on Wednesday became Iran’s oil minister and is now the new head of OPEC. Abbas would find a friend in this head of the world’s oil cartel who is not only from US-hating Iran but who has also been sanctioned by the U.S., the E.U. and Australia and has had his assets blacklisted. If you are wondering how this can happen, according to OPEC rules the leadership rotates among the countries and it is now in the hands of Iran whose oil minister is automatically the president of the oil cartel.

Is there any logic left at all in international relations? One can certainly have his doubt, that’s for sure.

George Washington said “There can be no greater error than to expect, or calculate, upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an allusion which experience must cure.” As true, now as it was then. The pressure on the UN delegates must be kept up.

2011-08-03T08:36:00.001-07:00

44 Days to Go – Missing an Opportunity to Miss an Opportunity

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 44 days to go to the opening of the UN General Assembly and the vote on Palestinian statehood it looks like Abba Eban’s statement that the Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity is in play once again.

Overnight the press reported that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has been in communication with President Obama and said that Israel would be willing to accept the 1967 armistice lines with mutually agreed upon land swaps as a baseline for peace talks as part of a package in which the Palestinian Arab leadership would (a) recognize Israel as the Jewish state and (b) desist from the pursuit of September’s vote on statehood at the UN. The Palestinians would then agree that the final goal of negotiations would be two states side by side, a Palestinian one and a Jewish one.

Jerusalem, while not endorsing the 1967 lines, would agree to language that would say that Israel recognizes that this is the position of the international community. The Israeli official quoted in the press said that the willingness to show this degree of flexibility would be contingent on the Palestinians demonstrating flexibility of their own and endorsing language nodding at recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.

Well it did not take very long for the Palestinian Arab leadership to dismiss this potential concession on future borders calling it a ploy. According to a report in London’s Telegraph, senior officials responded with considerable suspicion to claims that Prime Minister Netanyahu was prepared to compromise on his long-standing objections to Palestinian sovereignty over Judea and Samaria within its current boundaries.

Saeb Erekat, a leading Palestinian negotiator, said “When I hear this from Netanyahu’s lips, that he will accept an Israeli state along 1967 borders, I will believe it. But what I have read so far is a masterpiece of PR and linguistics. [The Israelis] do this very well.” He then added “Such an important thing deserves that Netanyahu speak to his people in Hebrew,
Arabic, English or Chinese, so we can hear him saying that he accepts a two state solution along the 1967 borders.”

In response Israeli official say they are prepared to accept a package proposed by the US and its negotiating partners as outlined above. Israel insists, of course, that adjustments would have to be made to allow us to annex some of our larger settlements in Judea and Samaria in exchange for land in Israel.

So, once again, an opening appears and the door is immediately shut. But this has happened before. And what is really amusing is that ever since Oslo when Arafat himself used to say one thing to the press in English (usually through an interpreter) and something entirely different to his people in Arabic, we have been demanding that the Palestinian leadership say in Arabic what they say to the world press, yet that normally does not happen. For the tables to be turned on us in a society with a free press is really ludicrous.

So the stalemate continues and another opportunity seems lost. For the moment, we will all go back to demonstrating for social equality while the politicians watch the days move ever closer to September. The frustration is palpable.

2011-08-02T08:01:00.001-07:00

45 Days to Go – The Best Case Scenario

By Sherwin Pomerantz

There are now 45 days to go to the opening of the UN General Assembly and the vote on Palestinian statehood.

Yesterday I painted a picture of the worst case scenario (although there are probably even worse ones than what I portrayed) but all is not negative. So let’s look at the possible positive side of all of this. After all, could I have lived here for almost 28 years if I didn’t think that there is, indeed, always a best case scenario? Of course not!

First of all, Israel has been up against threats to its survival for all of its 63+ years of existence. While there have been periods when things appeared quiet, under the surface there was never real quiet, never real peace, never real security, just a better situation sometimes as opposed to others. Yet through all of this, wars, homicide bombers, busses blowing up, envoys killed in far off places and well, there is no end to the list, Israel has prospered. Today, with all of the economic chaos going on in the world, the economy here is doing well, unemployment is at its all-time lowest levels, and indices of happiness are high.

Of course, over the past week hundreds of thousands of people have been demonstrating against the economic inequalities of this society, given high prices for food, housing and day care along with what is becoming a severe imbalance in the assets of the rich vs. the rest of society. While the demonstrators have a case and all of us are affected by things such as paying 10 times as much for spare parts for cars than people pay in the west (according to this morning’s papers), even those demonstrations are constructive. They reflect, in a very real way, the freedom people have here to express their opinions, criticize the government and demand change without the fear of political retribution. In spite of our faulty democracy, we still live in a country that respects people’s individual rights to voice their opinions and the demonstrations show the strength of that theory.

On the issue of relations with our Palestinian Arab population, much of the present activity pushing for UN recognition is a direct result, in my opinion, of a misguided US president who has chosen to be more Palestinian than the Palestinians. President Obama has put ideas in play that the Palestinian Arab leadership might never have put on the table but, once Obama said it, the Palestinians had no choice but to agree. Obamas insistence, for example, that all building in the settlements as well as East Jerusalem must cease, was a gift to the Palestinian leadership that they never expected from a US president. As such, their position has become more intransigent than it has ever been and has had the effect of forcing Chairman Abbas up a tree while the President has effectively left the garden. So much for depending on the US to be a broker.

As regards the UN vote, here too, there is an optimistic side. A host of Palestinian Arab leaders have publicly stated that it is a mistake to go the UN right now for a vote. Even an Arab country like Jordan has decided to vote “no” should the issue come to a vote. So while Chairman Abbas publicly claims that he will not be deterred, back channel meetings are held between representatives of both sides in order to find some way to avoid a nasty experience at the UN. While it is still not 100% clear why this week’s meeting in Amman between Israeli president Shimon Peres and Chairman Abbas was cancelled, just the fact that the meeting was scheduled, in itself, is a positive sign.

In politics, 45 days is a long time to be sure. While I believe that we must continue to do everything in our power to convince UN members to vote “no” should the issue of Palestinian statehood be brought to the General Assembly, in my heart I am convinced that the intelligentsia on the other side understands that it is not in the best interests of the Palestinian people to move ahead with a statehood request at this time. So on this too, I am somewhat optimistic.

This is a difficult time in the Jewish calendar. The run up to the observance of the Ninth of the Hebrew month of Av (Tisha B’av) next Tuesday has always been a treacherous time for our people during which, historically, terrible things happened to our ancestors and their communities. But, by nature, we are an optimistic people and we know that after Tisha B’av comes a most joyful period in the Hebrew calendar culminating in the New Year observances seven weeks later and the Sukkot festival just two weeks after that. So, regardless of the state in which we may find ourselves today, there is always tomorrow and tomorrow brings with it the promise of positive change. And it is that promise that propels me and gives me hope.

2011-08-01T07:12:00.000-07:00

46 Days to Go – The Worst Case Scenario

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 46 days to go to the opening of the UN General Assembly and the vote on Palestinian statehood it is probably time to take a look at worst case scenarios and what might happen the day after the UN vote, regardless of the which way it goes, although I still believe that it would be best if the vote were negative.

First of all there is Iran, who will be a menace in the region regardless of how the vote goes or even if it does not come to a vote.

Reza Kahlili, a pseudonym for an ex-CIA spy who requires anonymity for safety reasons, writes in the Washington Post this week:

"While America focuses on its internal problems and its involvement in three wars and the world focuses on the global economy, Iran is progressing on three dangerous fronts: nuclear weapons, armed missiles and naval capability. It is estimated that Iran will have enough highly enriched uranium for one nuclear bomb within two months and currently has enough low-enriched uranium for three nuclear bombs. Iran is also perfecting its missile-delivery systems. The (revolutionary) guards' ballistic missiles have a range of 1,200 miles, covering all U.S. bases in the Middle East and all of Israel, and now they possess missiles from North Korea with a range of 2,000 miles, which covers most of Western Europe."

About the naval capability he writes:

"In an alarming July 18 statement, Rear Adm. Habibollah Sayyari said the Iranian navy plans on deploying warships in the Atlantic Ocean as part of a program to ply international waters, although he did not say where in the Atlantic the ships would be sent. Two days later, Rear Adm. Seyed Mahmoud Mousavi revealed for the first time that the Iranian navy has equipped a number of its logistic vessels and units with long-range surface-to-surface missiles. He stated, "Missile frigates and destroyers have been equipped with these missiles since a long time ago, and the surface-to-surface missiles of the logistic vessels were successfully tested and assessed during the recent naval war games, dubbed as Joushan." So an Iranian navy ship or any commercial vessel operated by the Iranians could easily launch a missile from outside the Gulf of Mexico and essentially cover most of the United States. Much more alarming is the fact that once in possession of a nuclear bomb, Iran could successfully carry out its promise to bring America to its knees by a successful electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack on the country."

He closes by stating that “A nuclear-armed Iran will change our world with horrific consequences.”

Closer to home, Ha’aretz reported this week that Mahmoud al-Zahar, a prominent Hamas member in Gaza said of the UN vote: “The approach to the UN is a 'political scam.'” He is equally unequivocal on the so-called two-state solution, which aims at an Israeli state and a Palestinian state existing side by side. "We are not going to recognize Israel. That is very simple. And we are not going to accept Israel as the owner of one square centimeter because it is a fabricated state. On what moral basis was Israel established? On the right of return (of the Jews) after 4,000 years? It's just imagination." He says accepting Israel's right to exist would "cost 10 million Palestinians their right to Palestine. Who can pay that price? Who will go to the refugee camps and tell the people you have no right on Palestine?"

Finally, of course, there is the Israeli annexation movement spearheaded by Jerusalem Post Deputy Managing Editor Caroline Glick. She has taken the position that Israel only has two alternatives, either to annex all of Judea and Samaria (known as the West Bank) or be destroyed by its neighbors. According to her and others here in Israel who have aligned with her, there is no future in a two state solution and any attempt at coming to terms with the Palestinian Arabs is doomed to failure. Therefore, the only option is to take Judea and Samaria and make it part of Israel.

What a series of options eh? Be nuked by Iran, engage in long term war with Hamas or annex Judea and Samaria and run the risk of full regional war which, of course, has the potential to start World War III in earnest (although some of us believe that it has already begun). But war, of course, will not solve anything. Bertrand Russell is quoted as saying “War does not determine who is right, only who is left.” No one can argue with that but in these difficult days it is a real challenge even for an optimist like me to see a positive end to this without a significant amount of interim bloodshed. How I hope I am wrong.

2011-07-29T08:33:00.001-07:00

49 Days to Go - Read the Signs

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 49 days to go to the opening of the UN General Assembly and the vote on Palestinian statehood it remains quite amazing to me that this is the biggest news item coming out of the Middle East when so many other things are going on here that the West seems not to care about at all.

For example, according to a report in Lebanon’s Daily Star, almost 3,000 people have gone missing in Syria since the start of anti-regime protests more than four months ago. This was reported by the Avaaz non-governmental organization in a statement issued Thursday. The quote reads:

“Avaaz has today revealed the identities of 2,918 Syrians who have been arrested by Syrian security forces and whose whereabouts are now unknown,” the organization said in statement received by AFP in Nicosia. It said it was launching a campaign Thursday “to call for the release of the nearly 3,000 Syrians who have forcibly ‘disappeared’ since the peaceful uprising began on March 15th of this year.” The in-depth survey conducted by Avaaz estimates that one person is disappearing every hour. “In the past week alone there have been more than 1,000 arrests and the number of enforced disappearances has been rapidly rising on a daily basis, as the regime steps up its efforts to repress dissent in the build-up to Ramadan,” the statement said. According to the organization’s executive director, Ricken Patel, “hour by hour, peaceful protesters are plucked from crowds by Syria’s infamously brutal security forces, never to be seen again.” Avaaz said 1,634 people have died in the crackdown, 26,000 have been arrested, of whom 12,617 are still in detention."

Don’t you find it amazing in 2011 that international efforts have not been made to stop this action by the Assad government which is designed solely to ensure the continuance in power of the Alawite regime which is known to be both corrupt and brutal?

Or this item from UPI:

"Egypt, struggling to consolidate a revolution that deposed President Hosni Mubarak in February, faces what could be even worse turmoil because the country is running out of food as well as the money to buy it. Food prices are rising over 11 percent per month according to government provided statistics. At the same time, Egypt's annual urban inflation rate is also rising at the rate of 12 percent per month, underlining how key factors that triggered the popular uprising that forced Mubarak from office after 30 years remain in play. A dozen other Arab states were roiled by similar uprisings, some much less intense than Egypt's. But food prices and related economic grievances played a big part in these upheavals, unprecedented in modern Middle Eastern history."

Asia Times Online further noted that “The most populous country in the Arab world shows all the symptoms of national bankruptcy -- the kind that produced hyperinflation in several Latin American countries during the 1970s and 1980s -- with a deadly difference: Egypt imports half its wheat and the collapse of its external credit means starvation."

Finally the Jordan Times today reported the following:

"Upheaval across the Arab world is causing capital flight of up to $500 million a week, Finance Minister Mohammad Abu Hammour said on Thursday at an Arab banking conference in Rome. “There is capital flight. Five hundred million dollars a week are leaving the Arab world. Tourism is falling, foreign direct investment is falling,” Hammour said, pointing to volatility in oil prices as another negative. “Economic development is lagging. We need to guarantee job opportunities. This is a huge challenge... We need five million new jobs every year but we have only been able to generate three million jobs a year,” he said. Abu Hammour called for greater economic integration between Arab countries, greater assistance to small- and medium-sized enterprises and development of the private sector as ways to improve the economic outlook for the region. The minister was taking part in the International Arab Banking Summit organised by the Union of Arab Banks with senior bankers and central bank governors to discuss the implications of political upheaval in the region."

Amazing, is it not, what does and does not capture the headlines and the imaginations of western countries. While the issue I have been dealing with all these past months is certainly a critical one for those of us living here they have to be seen in the context of the region and its overall problems.

The biggest challenge to the world community is for our leaders to be able to see the big picture rather than zeroing in on one small section of the overall problem.

Former US President Harry Truman once said “Experience has shown how deeply the seeds of war are planted by economic rivalry and social injustice.” Those words ring true today as they did then and we need to take notice of the signals before it is too late.

2011-07-27T08:40:00.001-07:00

51 Days to Go – Palestinians Taking to the Streets

By Sherwin Pomerantz

51 days to go to the opening of the UN General Assembly and the vote on Palestinian statehood and it remains essential that the pressure on the representatives to the UN be kept up or even increased.

Palestinian Chairman Abbas is now clearly concerned about the seeming erosion of support that he had thought was “in his pocket.” News reports out of Israel indicate that Abbas has told his people directly to begin street demonstrations in Israel in support of the proposed UN vote. In his words:

"In this coming period, we want mass action, organized and coordinated in every place (in Israel). This is a chance to raise our voices in front of the world and say that we want our rights."

He then went on to say:

"I insist on popular resistance and I insist that it be unarmed popular resistance so that nobody misunderstands us. We are now inspired by the protests of the Arab Spring, all of which cry out 'peaceful', 'peaceful'."

Just what we need in Israel, eh?

Of course, it remains unclear whether he said this for local consumption or whether he really means for the people to take to the streets. But the good news is that he is worried and that means that the support is continuing to erode.

Meanwhile at the UN, Israeli Ambassador Ron Prosor addressed the issue of the vote on statehood in an address to the Security Council on Tuesday. In that presentation he spoke directly to the Palestinian Observer Mansour and said:

"Permanent Observer Mansour: On behalf of whom will you present a resolution in September? Mr. Abbas or Hamas? Will it be on behalf of both the Palestinian Authority and the Hamas terrorist organization, which advances a charter calling for the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews? Will it be on behalf of Akram Haniyeh – the PA’s Chief Spokesman— or Ismail Haniyeh – the Hamas Prime Minister in Gaza who said recently “When I say ‘the land of Palestine,’ I am not referring [only] to the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and Jerusalem…I refer to Palestine from the [Mediterranean] Sea to the [Jordan] River, and from Rosh Hanikra to Rafah.”

He then went on to say:

"Whether the Palestinians bring forward a resolution in the General Assembly or by invoking the “Uniting for Peace” resolution it is clear that the Palestinians are not united and are far from united for peace. There is much uncertainty about the future Palestinian government: its acceptance of the Quartet conditions, the peace process, control of its security forces, and many other questions. It will take at least until after the Palestinian elections next year before it is clear what Palestinian unity really means. For Israel, this so-called unity has only brought continued impunity for the terrorists that fire rockets into our cities."

The support for Palestinian statehood at the UN is cracking and we need to understand that not only is the vote itself wrong, we also need to be concerned about the day after the vote should it succeed, and what that will mean for us here in Israel as well.

As such, I continue to urge all of my readers not to let up pressure on the delegates to the UN and, towards that end, some of the questions raised by Ambassador Prosor bear repeating.

As always, the future is in our hands and we need to rise to the challenge. In the Ethics of the Fathers (Pirke Avot) Rabbi Tarfon is given credit for saying “It is not upon you to complete the task, but you are not free to idle from it.” That injunction is no less true today than it was when it was written and we need to hear it.

2011-07-20T15:13:00.000-07:00

First Person Story – Two Days with Christians United for Israel

By Sherwin Pomerantz

58 days to go to the opening of the UN General Assembly and the vote on Palestinian statehood but we are making progress. Jordan announced this week that they would vote “no” and some senior Palestinian officials are now seriously questioning the advisability of going in this direction at this time, so the pressure needs to be kept up. But let me share something different with you today.

“For 2,000 years Christians united Jews as they battled anti-Semitism, but for the first time in 2,000 years Jews are uniting Christians in support of Israel.”

The words are those of Pastor John Hagee, founder of Christians United for Israel (CUFI), the six year old, 750,000 strong Christian Evangelical grassroots organization dedicated to the support of Israel, and which is now the largest pro-Israel organization in the US. The event was a Night to Honor Israel on July 19th at the Washington Convention Center as part of CUFI’s now annual Washington Summit and I was proud to be there.

For someone like me who grew up in the New York of the 1940s and 1950s when my mother’s words, which still ring in my ears, were always “Don’t get them angry” referring to the Irish Catholics with whom we shared our Bronx neighbourhood, the evening was a revelation. To be in a hall having dinner with 5,000 Israel and US flag-waving, shofar blowing Christians whose single purpose for being there was to show support for Israel, their love for Israel, their solidarity with the Jewish people and who rose as one to sing Hatikvah and Jerusalem of Gold, the only word one can use is “inspiring.” I dare say that every other Israeli in the room, and there were quite a few of us, felt the same.

To be there on the 17th of Tammuz, the day when the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem were breached by the Romans was significant as well. Of course, respecting the tradition of our people, those of us who requested it were served a kosher meal but not until 9:01 PM when the fast day officially ended. Some of our “Jewish” organizations could learn a lesson or two from CUFI regarding sensitivity to our traditions as well.

There are those who criticize the Evangelicals for having another agenda. The concern is that at the end of days they would like to see all Jews gathered in Israel so that Jesus can arrive on the second coming. But clearly the parade of respected Jewish dignitaries who participated in the two day session was not concerned about this. They included Malcolm Hoenlein, US Sen. Joseph Lieberman, Rabbi Aryeh Shainberg of San Antonio, Elliott Chodoff, Rabbi Shlomo Riskin, Dennis Prager, John Podhoretz, IDF Res. Col. Ben Tzion Gruber, Amb. Michael Oren, and, via satellite, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

No doubt the position of CUFI vis-à-vis Israel is one not only of support, but also of what would normally be termed “right wing” support. Pastor Hagee in his comments minced no words on this subject when he said:

"America should never pressure Israel to divide Jerusalem. The day our government (i.e. the US) forces Israel to divide Jerusalem, that is the day that God will turn his back on America. The truth is that President Obama is not pro-Israel and he should never pressure Israel to divide Jerusalem. Obama has no authority to tell the Jewish people where they can or cannot build homes. The Jewish people are not occupiers of any part of Israel, it is their land given to them by God Almighty."

Clearly there is little room in this approach for a two-state solution or other frameworks currently under diplomatic consideration. But one does not have to agree with the overall political policy of the group to be grateful for the support of not only the 750,000 members of CUFI but, as well, the 50 million Evangelical Christians who live in the US and reflect similar feelings.

Make no mistake about it. The 5,000 members of CUFI who on July 20th had one-on-one appointments with a total of 432 of the combined 435 members of the US House of Representatives and 100 members of the US Senate for the sole purpose of letting these elected officials know about their constituent’s support for Israel is something for which Israel needs to be eternally grateful. The physical presence of constituents in the Washington offices of Representatives and Senators is, in the American political system, the strongest show of local concern possible. The fact that these are Christians doing the lobbying rather than Jews makes the case that support for Israel is not a Jewish issue but an American issue.

None of us know what will be at the end of days. As Pastor Hagee likes to say, some day he and his rabbi friends will be walking down the streets of Jerusalem and the Messiah will be coming the other way. At that point in time one of them will need to change his theology. Until then it is incumbent on his flock to support Israel.

He and his people believe in the words of the Torah which say “I will bless those that bless you and curse the one that curses you. And in you shall all families of the earth be blessed.” (Genesis 12:1-3). In these difficult days for Israel when we are becoming more and more isolated by the world community, the support of this population is a welcome respite from the barbs of those that seek our destruction. For that, we owe them thanks and appreciation for their new found commitment to our long term success in this land.

2011-07-18T15:29:00.001-07:00

60 Days to Go

5,000 Christian Evangelicals Can`t Be Wrong

By Sherwin Pomerantz

Just 60 days (i.e. two months) to go before the scheduled opening of the UN General Assembly in New York and the possible vote on Palestinian statehood. While there seems to be some progress on the diplomatic front the Palestinian Arab leadership continues to be hell bent on getting their resolution through the UN whether or not it will ultimately benefit them.

But even though their intent vis-à-vis Israel may indeed be negative, today I am not depressed. Today and tomorrow I am in Washington DC attending the annual Washington Summit of Christians United for Israel (CUFI) the evangelical Christian Zionist group whose support for Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people is unequivocal, spirited, vocal and dependable. To walk into a room of 5,000 people who, when the speaker says “The Land of Israel was given to the Jewish people by God Almighty and we will defend their right to this land until our dying day” everyone stands up, cheers, raises their hands and says “Amen” is, in a word, energizing.

Today’s opening plenary session featured, in addition to CUFI Founder Pastor John Hagee of San Antonio, television personality and commentator Rabbi Dennis Prager, Connecticut US Senator Joe Lieberman and CUFI Executive Director David Brog. There is not room to cover all of what was said in the 95 minute opening session, but Dennis Prager’s comments on legitimacy and its connection to refugees bears repeating.

The Arab leadership claims that in 1948 711,000 people were made homeless as a result of the creation of the State of Israel and the subsequent War of Independence. Today those 711,000 individuals have reproduced, with UNRWA’s figures showing the total now to be 4.7 million. And these numbers, of course, are the basis of the Palestinian insistence on the right of return. The anti-Israel forces in the world use these numbers, as well, to prove their claim that Israel is not a legitimate country given this huge refugee problem.

Yet the creation of Pakistan from land taken from India in 1947 created 7 million refugees, composed of Hindus and others. In addition, in 1977 the creation of Bangladesh from what was East Pakistan created yet another 7 million refugees. There are disputes about these numbers as some people claim they are even higher, but everyone agrees on a minimum of 14 million refugees. Yet no one anywhere in the world accuses Pakistan of being an illegitimate country or even seems to be overly concerned with solving that “refugee problem.” But we never hear about this anymore. Only Israel seems to be singled out from among all the nations of the world with refugee problems (and there are many) as, therefore, being illegitimate.

So being in an atmosphere as I was this morning where love for Israel, for the land, and even for Jews as a people, is, quite frankly, energizing and gives one a sense of hope. Here in the US there are millions upon millions of Christian supporters who believe in the bible, who accept that it is God’s word and who, after thousands of years of institutionalized Christian anti-Semitism, a new order had arisen that permits Sen. Lieberman to stand before the crowd and say, to resounding applause, “I am Joseph, your brother.”

It hit me as I was listening to all of this that if we ever get to the point in Jewish existence where our people believe in the bible to the same extent as these Christian Zionists, there is no doubt that the messiah will come. We can argue about whether it is the first time or the second time, but, at this point in time, that is almost simply a small detail.

There are, of course, plenty of people who question the real goals of the Christian Evangelicals. But at this point in history where Israel desperately needs all the friends it can muster, the fact that 5,000 people come to Washington for two days of education followed by one full day where each and every one of them will meet with their congress people to lobby on behalf of Israel is an act of devotion to which thinking people who care about Israel can only say “thank you, thank you very much.”
I was happy today to say thank you to so many people who support us and the only obstacle was to thank them before they thanks me and the significant number of others from Israel who spent the money and made the time to be here. More of us who care need to do this regularly.

2011-07-15T08:49:00.000-07:00

63 Days to Go

What is Roger Cohen’s Problem?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

There are now 63 days to go before the scheduled opening of the UN General Assembly in New York and the possible vote on Palestinian statehood. The Arab League on Thursday voted to support the bid of the Palestinian Arab leadership to go to the UN and will support their efforts to gain this recognition. The US has criticized the position of the Arab League on this issue and Canada this week has made it known that they will also vote “no.” Canada is proving a great friend of Israel this year to be sure.

In light of all of this why was I not surprised to see our dependably critical “friendly” columnist Roger Cohen (the New York Times calls him a “globalist” although not sure what that really means) come out with another one of his op-ed pieces roundly critical of Israel while drawing moral equivalency between us and the Palestinians.

He takes as his theme that this has been a “wasted year” when it comes to Middle East peace efforts. Well, it certainly has not been what one would call a productive year. Nevertheless, Roger Cohen, in his inimitable fashion finds a way to selectively report facts so that the country at fault is always Israel.

Early in his piece he makes the following statement:

"As usual, there’s plenty of blame to spread around. Obama had one of his worst moments last September when he brought the Israeli and Palestinian leaders to the White House to announce renewed talks, only for them to unravel as Israel refused to extend a moratorium on settlement expansion. Now, when the United States says to the Palestinians — “Trust us, come to the table, we can deliver” — they scoff."

Wow. How convenient. He says nothing about the fact that for a full ten months prior to the September meeting Israel did, in fact, maintain a moratorium on settlement expansion in an effort to bring the Palestinians to the table. But it was not until the last two weeks of that period that they finally said OK, we’ll come to the table, but you have to extend the moratorium. Why? Where were they for 10 months? Probably biding their time figuring Obama would give them yet another gift from his Palestinian Santa Claus gift sack, and he tried. But rightly so, our government said “been there, done that and no reason to do it again.” Does that make us the bad guys? I don’t think so.

He then goes on to say:

"The Israeli insistence on up-front recognition from the Palestinians of Israel as a “Jewish state” is absurd — a powerful indication of growing Israeli insecurities, isolation and intolerance. There was no such insistence a decade ago."

Cohen conveniently forgets that Israeli insistence on Palestinian recognition of Israel as the legitimate homeland of the Jewish people (i.e. the Jewish state), is nothing more than the mirror image of what Israel and seemingly the rest of world as well accepts as the legitimate claim of the Palestinians of their right to Palestine as their national homeland. And everyone, including Cohen, conveniently forgets that to that Chairman Abbas adds that (a) there will be no Jews allowed to live in the new State of Palestine and (b) if international forces are brought in to control any areas within the new state they cannot contain any Jews. And no one finds that objectionable. Cohen never mentions that at all but heaven forbid if we here were to make a similar claim about non-Jews we would be battered from pillar to post in every paper in the world and would provide Roger Cohen with enough fodder for ten more articles in the first week alone.

He concludes with his key line: “So pushing it (i.e. the Jewish state issue) to the front of the agenda is just Netanyahu’s way of putting delaying tactics ahead of strategic thinking once again.” Well, I have certainly pointed out in many of these blogs that our government may, indeed, lack sufficient strategic thinking to move the process forward. But the Prime Minister’s demand is not a delaying tactic but simply recognition of the purpose for which Israel was established and something that is our right to demand if the other side is doing the same.

63 years ago the Declaration of Independence of the State of Israel made our position perfectly clear:

"We…hereby declare the establishment of a Jewish State in the Land of Israel, to be known as the State of Israel."

No lack of clarity there but, contrary to the position of today’s Palestinian Arab leadership vis-à-vis their approach to Jews, our founders continued:

"We appeal, in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months, to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the building up of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions."

While one can argue whether we have fully achieved all that this last paragraph intended, there is no effort being made here to make this country Arab-rein. It is the Arab leadership of the future State of Palestine the desires their new country to be Juden-rein. Sad that Roger Cohen does not understand how totally imbalanced his views are when compared to reality. And yet the New York Times continues to give him this platform. It is testimony to the sad state of American journalism when one of the most prestigious news outlets in America gives such a man their imprimatur.

2011-07-13T11:28:00.000-07:00

65 Days to Go

Is Obama the Worst US President for Israel?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 65 days to go before the scheduled opening of the UN General Assembly in New York and the possible vote on Palestinian statehood former US Ambassador to the UN was in Israel this week and sat for an interview with representatives of the Jerusalem Post.

Regarding the UN vote itself he said: “Don’t pay attention to it as the General Assembly has no authority to authorize the creation of states or ratify their admission to the UN, only the Security Council has that right.”

Legally of course he is correct but even though I personally have a lot of respect for Bolton and his straight-shooting style of talk, on this one I agree with the text but not its import. For sure he is correct when he says that the UN General Assembly is not the body authorized by the UN charter to do this kind of thing. But having said that, and as I point out continually in this blog, the run-up to that event in and of itself will be problematic and deleterious for Israel’s image in the world.

Those who will argue in favor of the resolution will hurl all kinds of anti-Israel epithets as they justify the need to vote “yes.” That dialogue will probably be more harmful to Israel in the long run than the vote itself as those remarks will then be quoted out of context whenever someone needs purported validity to make a negative point about the country. It is not difficult to see Israel-bashers worldwide say, “this must be true because the UN ambassador of country X said so in public.” This is why it is so important not to sit idly by and watch this all happen.

As regards US President Obama, Bolton clearly stated “Barack Obama is the most anti-Israel US president in the history of the State of Israel.” As time goes on it is becoming clearer every day that this is the case. The US has a long Christian-based belief that Israel must be recognized as the homeland of the Jewish people in order to make it possible for the Jews of the world to come here and hasten the second coming of Jesus.

Many people believe, for example, that more than the influence of Harry Truman’s former business partner, Eddie Jacobson, it was this belief in the destiny of the Jewish people to be returned to Israel that encouraged former President Truman to immediately recognize the newly created State of Israel even over the advice of his own Department of State. After Truman, every president, some with greater intensity and some with less, supported the strong relationship between the US and Israel and saw that relationship as beneficial to the US’ interests in the region (even more so after 1967). It is only this current president that sees Israel as a problem to be solved rather than a country with which the US shares mutual interests.

Finally Bolton turned to Israel’s most serious existential problem, Iran. He said, “If Israel is not prepared to engage in a military strike at Iran, get ready for a nuclear Iran because the US will not do anything outside the diplomatic sphere.” To which he later added “Once Iran gets nuclear weapons it does not have to use them to have a problematic effect on the region as a whole. Everything you don’t like about Iran gets worse with a nuclear Iran. “

It is, of course, difficult to argue with his logic. We probably had a chance to do damage to Iran’s nuclear facilities in 2008 when they were smaller and less developed. But today, most people admit that we could not cause sufficient damage to warrant the carnage that we would witness here in the aftermath of such an attack.

But the threat remains and possibility of a nuclear Iran unafraid of western interference is not a comforting thought. It was not an encouraging thing to see in this morning’s papers, for example, pictures of the Israeli military along with senior members of the Ministry of Defense earlier this week taking a tour of sites in the Negev desert where they intend to evacuate Israelis in the event of air strikes in the north and center of the country.

So even those who are not Bolton fans, cannot help by give some thought to his statements and the reality of his presentation.

Renowned military leader and philosopher Karl von Clausewitz once said “If the leader is filled with high ambition, and if he pursues his aims with audacity and strength of will, he will reach them in spite of all obstacles.” Let’s hope that Israel is blessed with such leaders, but I have my reservations.

2011-07-10T22:38:00.001-07:00

67 Days to Go

Making our Demands Known

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 67 days to go before the scheduled opening of the UN General Assembly in New York and the possible vote on Palestinian statehood there is a lot of diplomatic action going on in order to avert what could be a difficult “day after” situation.

It is becoming more and more evident as the days go on that everyone involved in the process, even the Palestinian Arab leadership, would like to find some way to put something in place that would permit everyone to back off the vote initiative without losing face. Anyone who has spent any time at all in this region knows that, above all, saving face is the most important element of any negotiation.

The demands of the Palestinian Arab leadership remain somewhat unrealistic. They continue to demand that before they will come to the negotiating table Israel must stop building anywhere over the green line including the areas around Jerusalem. This is a particularly unrealistic demand as even their leadership understands that the ring communities around Jerusalem, for example, will remain within Israel under any future peace deal, should it be attainable.

The southern suburb of Gilo is one case in point. Of course building will continue there as even though it is over the green line, the tens of thousands of people who live there within less than a 5-minute drive to the center of Jerusalem will be included in Israel under all circumstances. Other communities are in that category as well.

Having said that there does appear to be some desire on the part of the Palestinians to find a way to come to the table. In recent days the Israeli government has also put some conditions on the table pre-requisite to our returning to negotiations. As of this morning, it now appears that our government is ready to begin negotiations based on the 1967 armistice lines with land swaps if the Quartet (i.e. EU, US, Russian & the UN) is prepared to speak officially about Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish people.

My readers will recall that in the past the Palestinian leadership has said that they are prepared to recognize Israel but not to do so as the national homeland of the Jewish people. This, even though the international community and the Israeli government have acceded to the fact that when a Palestinian state is put in place, it will be recognized as the national home of the Palestinian people.

These are important issues which are critical to forward movement and represent verbiage that is used throughout this region. Recognition of Israel as the legitimate national homeland of the Jewish people carries with it the acknowledgement that we have a 3,500 year history in this land, that based on that history we have a legitimate claim to this land as our homeland and that the family of nations recognizes this historical fact. It is because of these reasons that our negotiators have made a point of demanding this language be used in any future negotiation that will lead to the end of the conflict.

I have no way of telling if the Palestinian Arab leadership will accept this or not. But what is equally important is that both our government and the Jewish people worldwide understand and internalize this fact which then enables us to defend our right to be here in the context of human history.

The words of the Declaration of Statehood of Israel in 1948 are clear and still valid:

"(We) hereby declare the establishment of a Jewish state in the land of Israel to be known as the State of Israel. …Israel will be open for Jewish immigration and for the Ingathering of the Exiles; it will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants; it will be based on freedom, justice and peace as envisaged by the prophets of Israel; it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex; it will guarantee freedom of religion, conscience, language, education and culture; it will safeguard the Holy Places of all religions; and it will be faithful to the principles of the Charter of the United Nations."

All that is desired by those of us living here today is to realize in fact what the declaration stated in principle.

2011-07-08T07:43:00.001-07:00

70 Days to Go

The Positive Effect of Pressure

By Sherwin Pomerantz

There are now 70 days to go before the scheduled opening of the UN General Assembly in New York and the possible vote on Palestinian statehood. This week we have seen the benefit of pressure when it is exerted in the right direction. Some examples follow.

• A rare visit from Prime Minister Netanyahu to Romania elicited a promise from the government there to oppose any unilateral vote for Palestinian statehood at the upcoming meeting of the UN General Assembly. (He did not fare quite as well in neighboring Bulgaria, but we are speaking here about successes.)

• After a great deal of international pressure the Netherlands this week also made known that they would vote against. This is a good indication of the weakening support of moderate European countries for the resolution, something that has surprised the Palestinian leadership.

• The sea flotilla to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza has all but disintegrated. Greece, under pressure from Israel, did not permit the boats docked there to leave and even arrested the captain of the US vessel when he tried to leave port after being warned not to do so.

• The alternate air flotilla which was schedule to deliver hundreds of Palestinian supporters to Ben Gurion Airport here beginning last night has also fizzled significantly. It seems that Israeli security authorities released a list to airlines flying to Israel of approximately 350 pro-Palestinian activists who they suspected would be travelling here for protest purposes. Many of those airlines, realizing that the people they were transporting would not be allowed into the country and would need to be returned to their countries of origin at the airlines` expense refused to let many of those people board. In Paris, for example, at DeGaulle Airport, 50 activists approached the Lufthansa terminal and were denied boarding. Similar events took place across Europe.

Clearly, as I have been saying for some weeks, pressure works and keeping quiet achieves nothing. As such, it is now more important than ever that as many people as possible write to the United Nations delegates stationed in New York. The message needs to be that we, private citizens of the world who care about the future of Israel, urge them not to vote for unilateral approval of a Palestinian state should this come to the floor of the UN in September.

We are doing this because we believe that the only path to peace in this region is negotiation between the parties involved and not through unilateral steps taken at the world body or anywhere else for that matter. The delegates need to know that there are thousands of people out there who care, who are concerned, and who want them to vote NO!

Towards that end, once again I am attaching the full list of UN delegates in New York, along with their addresses and, where we were able to find them, fax numbers and e mail addresses as well. The time to act is now. I am convinced that if each mission to the UN is flooded with this type of mail over the next 9 weeks, it will make many of them think again about their decision (should it be in favor of the motion) and probably make a good news story as well, which will help us.

British philosopher John Stuart Mill who died in 1873 is credited with the following insightful statement about inaction: “A person may cause evil to others not only by his actions, but by his inaction, and in either case he is justly accountable to them for the injury.” Words to the wise to be sure. Please write!

2011-07-07T00:00:00.000-07:00

71 Days to Go

The Slippery Slope to a Big Brother Country

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 71 days to go before the scheduled opening of the UN General Assembly in New York and the possible vote on Palestinian statehood Israel continues to make public relations blunders giving our enemies plenty of fodder on which to feed.

A couple of weeks ago I wrote how I thought Israel was making a potentially incredibly huge blunder by opposing the flotilla to Gaza. At the time I suggested boarding the ships, checking their cargo and, if it was full of humanitarian aid as the organizers claimed, that we then escort the ships into the harbor in Gaza, with our flags flying proudly. After all, if the ships were carrying such cargo we really don’t have any objection to it getting into Gaza so why not ensure its arrival?

Well, the naval flotilla has all but disintegrated for the moment, thanks to some Mediterranean area friends. Interestingly enough, a UN report due to be issued today on the May 2010 debacle actually faults Turkey for their role in supporting last year’s flotilla as well as Israel for using excessive force. As a matter of fact the report supports Israel’s right to blockade Gaza. Will wonders ever cease?

Nevertheless, over the next 24 hours we are about to cause yet another international flap. According to press reports approximately 500 (or more) peace activists from around the world, holding valid travel documents permitting their entry into Israel (i.e. either a visa or a passport from a country where a prior-issued entry visa to Israel is not required such as the U.S.) are due to arrive at Ben Gurion Airport near Tel Aviv. Their purpose in coming here will be to demonstrate in support of the Palestinian cause and the end of Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza. Seems like the kind of thing that any country claiming to be the only democracy in the region would certainly permit, although not necessarily encourage.

But this is Israel 2011, a country whose democratic base is being questioned at every turn. So our government has decided that these activities should not be permitted to enter the country and as a result has taken the following actions:

• Requested airlines coming to Israel to forward their passenger manifests to Israel 48 hours before arrival so that the authorities here can scan the lists for activists.
• Those people so identified will be questioned when they arrive at the airport and, according to the papers here, will not be permitted to enter Israel and then placed on the next plane back to their point of origin.
• If the authorities here find that there is a plane with an inordinate number of such people on board, that plane will not be allowed to taxi to the terminal but will land on a distant runway and be boarded by security personnel who will then decide who stays and who is turned back. Those permitted to stay will then be bused to the terminal for processing while the others will be summarily deported.
• There will be representatives of the High Court of Justice at the airport to handle any cases where people demand to invoke the processes of the judicial system.
• Between 600-1000 extra security personal have been dispatched to the airport to assist the regular staff there to handle this operation turning the terminal into an armed fortress.
• Additional security staff will be stationed outside the terminal building itself so that if those who do get through the screen then choose to demonstrate, self-immolate or whatever, there will be staff in place to handle that.

In case any of my readers are unaware of the laws of entry into foreign countries, all countries, including the U.S., have a two tier entry system in place. Granting someone a visa to travel simply permits the person to board the plane and travel to the destination country. In the U.S., for example, the visa is issued by the Department of State. Once at passport control at the port of entry the visitor can be denied entry for any number of reasons and, in the U.S. once again, that is the purview of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. Similar procedures are in place here as well.

I have no doubt that many of the arrivals here over the next few days will be turned back and I also have no doubt that the foreign press will be present at the airport in significant numbers to interview, film and distribute the footage to their respective news agencies. And then the fun will begin….wait until you see Sunday and Monday’s headlines worldwide!

And what should we have done instead? Simply apply the standard procedures this country always does with people entering the country. For sure we have security processes in place and if there are known terrorists, people who have been previously deported for illegal activity or security threats we send the people back. And those actions, similar to what most democratic countries do around the world, generally do not make headlines. But to give our enemies a public relations field day is, in my opinion, simply bad management on the part of our government. Not the first time to be sure, and, sadly, not the last either.

Martin Luther King Jr is reported to have said “Man is man because he is free to operate within the framework of his destiny. He is free to deliberate, to make decisions, and to choose between alternatives.” The people who are travelling here this week seem to be able to do that much better than those who make decisions for us here. How I wish that were not the case.

2011-07-05T06:35:00.003-07:00

73 Days to Go

Israel’s Challenge: Qualified Leadership

By Sherwin Pomerantz

There are now 73 days to go before the scheduled opening of the UN General Assembly in New York and the possible vote on Palestinian statehood. The Palestinian Arab leadership has another week to decide whether to file the application or not and there are indications now that the leadership is wavering vis-à-vis its decision to proceed or abandon the effort.

Yesterday the Dutch leadership made it known that they are not prepared to support such a unilateral move on the part of the Palestinian Arabs and it would appear that the much sought after European support for the initiative is anything but assured. So time will tell how serious September 14th really is right now.

But while the government’s attention here has been turned almost exclusively to the potential events in September and the current activity to prevent a new flotilla to break the blockade of Gaza, the other problems in the region remain in place. For example the future political leadership of Egypt and how it will view its relationship with Israel remains an unknown. We know that there are voices within the country actively pushing for a diminution of that relationship and overnight there was yet a third sabotaging of the Egyptian gas pipeline in the Sinai which supplies natural gas to both Israel and Jordan. So the signs are worrisome.

In addition, Syria remains in the throes of civil unrest with hundreds of deaths already reported and no end to the chaos in sight. It is almost impossible to predict what will happen there and, regardless of the outcome, its ultimate effect on Israel.

Finally, the Iranian nuclear issue which our current Prime Minister has said time and time again is the most serious problem we as a country face, seems to be no closer to positive resolution today that it was when he was elected two years ago. The Iranians continue to move forward with the nuclear weapons initiative, despite their remonstrations to the contrary, and their continued bashing of everything American and Israeli.

While the government here seems to be handling the diplomatic aspects of scuttling the flotilla quite well and has made some inroads on the Palestinian statehood issue as well, people here still have the feeling that we simply don’t have the best people in place heading various ministries of the government. Because of coalition politics individuals end up in jobs for which they are neither properly prepared nor intellectually competent to handle. Our ministers of Foreign Affairs, Finance and Industry, Trade & Labor are three that stand out. The first has become persona-non-grata in most world capitols, the second was pushed into the position with no prior experience in economics and the third spent all of his professional life in the agricultural sphere far away from dealing with the issues of economic development attendant to his new position. Couldn’t we have done better?

We are fortunate in this country to have some of the brightest people heading up significant commercial enterprises, universities and think tanks, whose expertise is acknowledged in world forums. Yet these people seemingly are rarely if ever tapped for government service or, in some cases, when asked, are not prepared to expose themselves to the vagaries of a government run under the challenges of coalition politics. After all, wouldn’t the CEO of the largest manufacturer in the world of generic pharmaceuticals be a good Minister of Industry, Trade & Labor? Wouldn’t a former Ambassador to the US who also did a productive stint as the president of one of the country’s largest universities make a good candidate for Minister of Foreign Affairs? And don’t you think the head of one of Israel’s major investment houses who has years of financial management experience, degrees from the world’s best universities and a track record of financial success would make a good prospect for Minister of Finance?

Well, if this country is going to get past middle age successfully, at some point the Prime Minister and his top advisors will have to look beyond the governing coalition to the people here who really know how to manage and have the professional experience to qualify them for their positions, regardless of their politics. Until that happens we will continue to muddle along, selecting our ministers on the basis of their political strength rather than their professional capabilities.

Former US President Theodore Roosevelt once said “The best executive is the one who has sense enough to pick good men to do what he wants done, and self-restraint enough to keep from meddling with them when they do it.” Now there’s a lesson our leadership needs to internalize!

2011-07-04T07:18:00.003-07:00

74 Days to Go

Uncharacteristically Passive Israelis

By Sherwin Pomerantz

While there seems to be some wavering on the part of the Palestinian Arab leadership vis-à-vis the UN vote on statehood for Palestine, the countdown continues. It would seem that both the fact that the flotilla effort this year has imploded with the help of some of our friends and the seeming “drying up of” support payments from the Arab world to the Palestinian Authority have had a depressing effect on the movement for statehood. Nevertheless, efforts to derail the initiative remain in place so we continue to be watchful of events in the region.

What is surprising, however, is the passivity of the Israeli public on issues relating to the international challenges that face us over the next months as we approach September and, what is sometimes scarier, what happens “the day after.” I’ll leave that part of the subject to another blog but today, let’s take a look at the passivity issue.

One could easily list a dozen or more items about which the Israeli public should be rightfully agitated and upset. From this writer’s perspective they include, but are not limited to, (a) the lack of a coherent and realistic statement by our government on what our vision is for the future, (b) the lack of action regarding the embarrassment who serves as our Minister of Foreign Affairs, (c) the absence of backup systems when critical aspects of national survival fail us [e.g. May’s contamination of our jet fuel supplies…the reason not yet determined], (d) the failure of Jerusalem’s light rail line to be operational after eight years of construction [Dubai built theirs in 18 months, and it was mostly elevated to boot], (e) the unwillingness of our government to do what needs to be done to bring Gilad Schalit home and (f) the continued introduction and eventual passage of clearly racist laws by our Knesset.

Here in one of the most vocal, most demonstrative societies in the world there are almost no mass demonstrations on any of these issues. Yes, there are occasional protests on the issue of Gilad Schalit but, even those, are not the kinds of things we used to see here in the past. Even the recent demonstrations mounted against the arrest of some rabbis who refused a police order to appear and were subsequently arrested, did not bring out the numbers we used to see in the past.

Sadly, and maybe this tells us something, the only problem that energized our populace sufficiently to actually demonstrate and make something happen was the run-up in prices of cottage cheese. Via a massive Facebook campaign the buying public was actually successful in getting the producers and retailers of cottage cheese to roll back their mercenary price increases of the last year. But in no other sphere have we seen anything like the hundreds of thousands who demonstrated in Tel Aviv in 1982 after the Sabra & Shatilla massacres, or even the anti-Oslo demonstrations of the early 90s.

Have we gone soft? Has Israeli society become so inured to the futility of raising its voice that it has gone completely silent? I don’t think so. Rather I think what has happened is that the Prime Minister, whose seemingly only objective is to keep himself in power and his coalition in place (even though I am sure he tells himself that he is doing the best job possible for the country), has cobbled together a coalition of interests each of which is getting their needs met. Given that, why should they encourage any demonstrations that might upset that apple cart and potentially destroy the coalition? So on the one hand you have a population that, in spite of what is going on all around us is generally living a good life with a healthy economy, the lowest unemployment in many years and general quiet on the security front with a coalition that clearly does not want to rock the boat. And we wonder why there are no demonstrations? It’s obvious.

George Washington once said “The marvel of all history is the patience with which men and women suffer to burdens unnecessarily laid upon them by their governments.” Those words, uttered over 200 years ago ring true yet today. We owe it to ourselves to protest such burdens before they work to unravel what has been successfully built here in the last 63 years.

2011-07-02T23:55:00.000-07:00

75 Days to Go

Let’s Hear It for Greece!

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With just 75 days to go before the opening of the UN General Assembly and the still possible vote to grant statehood to the Palestinian Arabs, many other side events are in the works as well.

The most current one is the attempt by people from around the world to mount a new flotilla to Gaza with the intent of breaking Israel’s blockade of the Hamas-ruled territory. Ostensibly the reason given by those participating is that this is a humanitarian mission designed to bring much needed supplies to the deprived Gazans.

Well, the whole world knows and honest people will admit that Israel now permits hundreds of trucks a day to enter Gaza with all kinds of supplies that the border with Egypt is now open and receptive to shipments of materiel as needed and that, for all practical purposes, there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza at all. There is, of course, wide spread unemployment and some serious economic issues to be dealt with. But many of those could be intelligently addressed if the Hamas leadership would accept the demands of the world to recognize Israel, give Gilad Shalit back to his waiting parents, and abandon its extremist positions which have only worked to the long term detriment of the people living there.

No, the real purpose of the flotilla which has yet to float is to break Israel’s blockade of Gaza which is designed solely to prevent the arrival of weapons caches to the territory whose leadership is committed to Israel’s destruction. Such a blockade is entirely legal according to international law. Further, Israel’s willingness to off load the flotilla’s humanitarian cargo in Ashdod for transfer to Gaza (and Egypt’s approval to do the same) is proof that the only impetus for the blockade on Israel’s part is to control the entry of weapons into the territory.

Typical of the kinds of people who are populating these ships is Pulitzer-prize winning author Alice Walker. In an interview by Robert Zeliger published in Foreign Policy magazine on June 23rd, she says:

"I think Israel is the greatest terrorist in that part of the world. And I think in general, the United States and Israel are great terrorist organizations themselves. If you go to Gaza and see some of the bombs – what’s left of the bombs that were dropped – and the general destruction, you would have to say, yeah, its terrorism. When you terrorize people, when you make them so afraid of you that they are just mentally and psychologically wounded for life – that’s terrorism. So these countries (i.e. the US and Israel) are terrorist countries."

Given all of this it is entirely logical that a country friendly to Israel would cooperate with Israel and prevent the flotilla’s ships from leaving its ports. Greece, whose relations with Israel have improved dramatically as a result of Israel’s worsening relations with Turkey after the last flotilla in May 2010, did what any responsible member of the family of nations would do and prohibited the flotilla from setting sail from its ports. I say thank you Greece! For once our diplomatic efforts seemed to have been well directed and successful.

There are still some ships that have the hope of sailing here and I retain the belief that our government will act differently from the way they did in May 2010 if these ships do approach the Israeli coast. I don’t believe that Israel will do what I suggested in an earlier blog, that is to board the ships, inspect the cargo and if it is, indeed, all humanitarian in nature, escort the ships into Gaza harbor with Israeli flags flying. It would, indeed, be a great public relations coup to do that, at least in my opinion. But if some ships do sail, and if they do approach the Israeli costs, perhaps we can do what blogger Roi Ben-Yehuda suggested and that is to have some conflict resolution professionals board those ships rather than representatives of our own military. These “soldiers of peace” would be one of the new tools designed to maximize the possibility of a non-destructive outcome. Now wouldn‘t that be a kick?

2011-06-29T07:18:00.000-07:00

79 Days to Go

Chinks in the Armor….Take Heart!
By Sherwin Pomerantz

As of today there are 79 days to the opening of the United Nations General Assembly and the vote on recognizing Palestinian statehood. It appears that chinks are developing in the armor and that even among the Arab population in the region, it is not a given that a unilateral declaration of statehood is the way to go.

Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad in an interview with the Associated Press earlier this week said that:

"UN recognition of a Palestinian state would largely be a symbolic victory and would not change the reality of the Israeli occupation."

Asked if anything would change on the ground after UN recognition, he said:

"My answer to you is no. Unless Israel is part of that consensus, it won’t because to me, it is about ending the Israeli occupation."

Writing in Kuwaiti newspaper Al Watan, journalist Abdallah al-Hadlaq stated on June 22nd:

"The Palestinians strive to obtain premature recognition for a “Palestinian State” this September despite the danger of derailing the peace talks, which is implicit in a unilateral declaration…..A unilateral declaration will not conclude the conflict but only make matters worse, making it more intense instead of ending it. The Palestinians seem to have lost their keen interest in negotiation aimed at a reaching a deal, and now only want to act unilaterally in ways that will never solve key problems in the current impasse - which can only be tackled through direct talks between the parties concerned. Continued Palestinian obstinacy just complicates the conflict. As the Palestinians press on unilaterally for premature recognition of their ”State”, they ignore Israel’s right to exist peacefully as the state of the Jewish people, recognized and living within its borders. "

Interesting words from the Arab world to be sure, coupled with more and more pressure on the organizers of the next flotilla to abandon their plans. Of course, all of this as the UN continues to play the game as it were. Yesterday and today, in Brussels, the UN’s Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People is hosting what they call the United Nations International Meeting in Support of the Israel-Palestinian Peace Process. Many nations will be represented in Belgium at these sessions except one that was not invited…Israel.

Is it conceivable that the very same UN that is being petitioned by the Palestinian Arab leadership to grant them statehood sponsors a meeting on the peace process here and does not invite Israel? Can any organization that does this have credibility? Perhaps Salam Fayyad and Abdallah al-Hadlaq (quoted above) understand this and realize that even if the UN General Assembly were to accede to the petitions of the Palestinian Arab leadership, the vote would, indeed, be meaningless,.

I am not saying that there would be no fallout. I have no doubt that the fallout would be significant and that the lives of those of us here could turn into a living hell come the winter. But intelligent Arab voices now seem to be speaking out with an understanding of the folly of pursuing the UN vote.

Therefore, it is all the more important that people write to the UN delegates now urging them to vote “no” should this come to the floor of the General Assembly. This not because it is bad for Israel, but because it is bad for the region and recognition at this time would, in and of itself, contribute to the further destabilization of the region.

That, of course, does not let us off the hook either. World Jewish Congress President Ron Lauder in an address to the participants in the International Congress of Jewish Parliamentarians meeting here in Jerusalem this week, castigated the Prime Minister of Israel for not having put forth Israel’s plan for peace. He said that Israel must present a diplomatic plan in order to regain international support and block Palestinian efforts to obtain unilateral recognition for statehood from the UN in September.

As you know I have been saying this for some time as I believe our thrust has to be bi-directional. On the one hand we need to use all of the resources at our disposal to thwart the UN vote while on the other hand the world must be made aware of our diplomatic plan to end the stalemate and bring peace to the region.

Theodore Roosevelt once said “In a moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing to do. The worst thing you can do is nothing.” We need to internalize that concept and fast!

2011-06-28T07:00:00.000-07:00

80 Days to Go
Do People Who Lynch Jews Deserve UN Recognition?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

There are now 80 days to the opening of the United Nations General Assembly and the vote on recognizing Palestinian statehood. Are the Palestinians ready for that should it be granted? Perhaps not.

On Sunday of this week Nir Nachshon, a driver for a moving company here was on his way home to Ma’ale Adumim from Jerusalem when he ran into traffic in the area of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. In an effort to get around the traffic he consulted his GPS system and, to his regret, when following the shortcut ended up in the East Jerusalem village of Issawiya, less than 4 miles from where I am drafting this piece.

As he entered the village someone saw his car and screamed, in Arabic, “Jew, Jew,” and then the trouble began. Speaking to reporters from his hospital bed at Hadassah Hospital – Ein Kerem, after the incident he said “they started throwing rocks and cement blocks right into the car. I realized I was going to die and I started thinking this isn’t the way I want to die.”

When asked about the incident, Nachshon said that just as he made the turn he realized he was in the wrong place but didn’t realize how big an issue it would become. As he said: ”This is Jerusalem, this is home.”

The initial assailant kept calling out the words “Jew, Jew” and each time more people came out of the alleyways to throw whatever they could lay their hands on directly at the car.

Fortunately, some righteous person, Darwish Darwish, a local Palestinian Arab, saw what was happening and understood that Nachshon’s life was in danger. He then plucked Nachshon from the car and took him to his house. He wiped the blood that was now streaming down Nachshon’s face with a wet towel and then told Nachshon that it was not safe for him to remain there. Darwish, a muchtar of the village, had his sons take Nachshon out a back door into a car and drive him to the outskirts of the village where he was turned over to Israeli authorities and taken to the hospital.

In an act of incredible humanity, Darwish later went to Ma’ale Adumim to visit Nachshon and apologize for what happened. He said “I condemn this act; I ask for your forgiveness and invite you to return to the village.”

So the story ends on a happy note but could have ended quite differently save for the actions of one righteous person who saw the enemy and realized “they are us.”

No doubt some people will say Nachshon should not have been in the village at all. But does that address the question? Is making a wrong turn in Jerusalem something that should put our lives in danger? If the anger of the mob living in such close proximity to the rest of us is such that it can boil over in an instant and threaten our lives, can we accept that?

For sure it would be wrong to label an entire people with negative adjectives based on the actions of a few. But this is not the first time that something like this has happened and it probably will not be the last either. The problem goes deep into the educational system where Palestinian Arabs are taught from the earliest years that all of Israel is land that has been stolen from them, that the struggle to retake the land will end only when victory is assured and the we, Jews who have lived here for 3,500 years, have no rightful claim to the land.

I have argued before that the concept of two states for two peoples living side by side in security and safety is something I can support. But events of this type prove that moving forward on this track unilaterally is not in the best interests of either party and a UN vote in September in favor of recognition would be a major problem for Israel. People who attempt to lynch Jews for simply driving into their neighborhoods are, ipso facto, not ready for statehood and self-government.

2011-06-27T06:24:00.001-07:00

81 Days to Go

Flotilla, Shmotilla!
By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 81 days to the opening of the United Nations General Assembly and the vote on recognizing Palestinian statehood the heat in the kitchen has not abated.

Today the Palestinian Authority announced after a late night meeting that regardless of any other initiatives currently being discussed the move to recognition of statehood will continue unabated. I’m not sure why anyone would be surprised at that news, I certainly was not. So the need to express our opinions, in writing, to every UN delegate remains in place.

But the next international crisis is scheduled to take place on Thursday when the next flotilla to break the blockade of Gaza is due to enter Israel’s territorial waters. And what is the planned response here?

• The Prime Minister’s office has announced that foreign journalists travelling on any of the ships of the flotilla could later be barred from entering Israel for the next 10 years. So much for freedom of the press, don’t you think?
• The Minister of Defense has called the flotilla an “unnecessary provocation” as there is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza. He went on to say that the Israeli military intends to prevent the flotilla from landing in Gaza and is prepared to use military force if needed although it hopes it will not be needed. Sound familiar?
• And the official line from the Government’s diplomatic envoys is that an agreement has been reached with the Egyptians whereby in addition to Israel being ready to permit the off-loading of humanitarian supplies destined for Gaza in Ashkelon, the Egyptians are prepared to do the same in El-Arish, just south of the strip. Not sure this will placate the protestors.

Why is our government having trouble seeing that we are heading directly into yet another public relations debacle if we pursue this “same old” approach to such efforts by people who feel committed to their cause? True, the Turkish government has urged the IHH there not to support the flotilla, and the IHH has pulled the famous Mavi Marmara from the convoy. And just as true, some Mediterranean governments have made it known that they will not permit ships of the flotilla from using their docks as launch sites for this effort. At the same time the US has called the flotilla a provocation. But we know that, in spite of all of this, ships are en route and will be in the area on Thursday morning.

What will we do this time? Will we, once again, in an effort to stop the ships from reaching Gaza direct them to stop and, if they don’t, have our young men and women board those vessels and put their lives in danger? For what purpose? To prove what point? To be able to say we have a right to impose a blockade on a regime that is committed to our destruction? Will that matter to anyone if, once again, people on those ships are injured or killed? At this critical time in our history can’t we find some way to turn this situation into a win for us rather than yet another public relations failure? I think we can.

If, as the press as reported, we are prepared to allow the ships to land in either Ashkelon or El-Arish, unload their cargo and then insure safe transfer to Gaza, why not go one step further and capture the narrative on this issue? Why not send out a message now that it is our intention to stop each of the ships and inspect the cargo to ascertain that it is, indeed, humanitarian in nature. If, as the organizers claim, the cargo is composed wholly of humanitarian aid (i.e. no weapons, incendiaries, ammunition or similar materiel) then we should let those ships pass and deliver their cargo to Gaza. Actually, if I had my way I would actually escort the flotilla to Gaza with our Israeli flags flying high and have aerial photographers in place to record the action for posterity and the BBC.

If, as the organizers claim, their only intent is to make life easier for the Gazans and if, as the Gazans claim, all they want is to be able to unload these goods in their port let’s test the waters and see where it takes us. If there are no weapons or related materials aboard, the world might even applaud our approach. If, however, we find contraband on board then the world will know what the flotilla organizers really meant by the term “humanitarian aid.” I think it is worth the chance even though I know a lot of people will disagree with me. Well, it won’t be the first time that’s happened and probably not the last either.

Kirkegaard said “To dare is to lose one’s footing momentarily. To not dare is to lose oneself.” I would rather not take the latter risk.

2011-06-26T04:01:00.000-07:00

82 Days to Go
Start-up Country?
By Sherwin Pomerantz
So the count is now 82 days to the opening of the United Nations General Assembly and the vote on recognizing Palestinian statehood. There does appear to be some chinks developing in the armor, as it were but time will tell what kind of flexibility we will see on both sides.

Meanwhile, my business partner, Ben Dansker with whom I have been associated for 25 years and whose intellect I highly respect, came up with an idea late last week the made me believe he is the best person to write today’s blog so, with gratitude to his commitment to do this, following is his analysis of where we are as a country. Hope you find it of interest.

=============================================================================

Frequently observers of businesses and corporations as well as academics, researchers, and often just plane pundits and kibitzers will point out that the kind of leadership and organizational processes which a company needs at its inception and its early years often differs sharply from the kinds of skills, people, and leadership needed when a company grows and matures. There is nothing particularly new in this, people have been talking and writing about this for decades. In fact most companies, though often only after a major crisis, do make the kinds of changes necessary to adapt to a new, larger, more mature corporate reality and environment.

It may be that countries are the same. That just as a company often needs a different and perhaps more professional leadership and management when it matures than it did when it was trying to invent itself, to develop a product and get it to market, a country too needs a different kind of leadership than it did in the early decades. Israel at its inception, 63 years ago was led and run by much the same kind of culture that characterizes start-ups. Quick decisions, passion and ideology, and that combination of Israeli chutzpa, chafifiut (loosely translated as amateurishness or carelessness),and faith in an idea, a kind of the world be damned, go it alone sort of approach to problems. The leaders of Israel in its early days were daring, risk taking, passionate ideologues, to be sure, but rarely professionals, not so unlike many of the founding fathers of the United States or so many other democracies.

Israel's population has grown more than ten fold in 63 years, orders of magnitude more than any other country in the world. Its economy has grown as well. If Israel was once called a poor country with a lot of rich people, today it is a rich country, though with unfortunately a lot of poor people. Few countries, if any have had to contend with the challenges to its development and even its very existence as has Israel and in spite of manifold problems, it hasn't done badly in many spheres.

Certainly few of those passionate founding fathers would have imagined the extent of its success in absorbing waves of immigration, of building an enviable technology based industry, of being able to boast one of the strongest currencies and economies in the world. And yet, the culture of governance has not changed, the same lack of professionalism, lack of attention to proper governance processes, the same combination of chutzpa and chafifanut, still characterize the way the decisions are made, the way the country is governed, the way Ministers are selected for ideological and political reasons and not because they know anything about their particular Ministry.

The idea that yihe be’seder,(it will be okay), still pervades our thinking in the face of whatever disasters seem to be lurking.

A more professional and process oriented leadership and governance would not solve the tremendous problems facing Israel, but perhaps it would strengthen Israel's ability to deal with them.

=================================================================================
How right he is!!!

2011-06-24T08:27:00.000-07:00

84 Days to Go
Shades of 1938

By Sherwin Pomerantz

There are now 84 days to go to the opening of the United Nations General Assembly and the vote on recognizing Palestinian statehood. The latest out of the Palestinian Arab leadership today is that even if Israel goes back to the negotiating table with Chairman Abbas, the Palestinian Authority will continue with its efforts to gain General Assembly support. Why not? Its climb all over Israel time worldwide.

The only positive ray of hope over the last few days was US Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota’s 6th Congressional District who came out with an incredibly strong statement in support of Israel and America’s obligation to understand that and all it means. You can see for yourself at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7cMxE1oFf0&feature=player_embedded

That offset just a bit the recent announcement that Delta Airlines is having Saudi Arabian Airlines join their Sky Team alliance. No big deal, of course, as most of these alliances are constantly seeking to expand their reach. But in this case the conditions that the Saudis laid down for Delta included a few less than comforting facts. We all know, for example, that the Kingdom does not issue entry visas to Israelis or anyone with an Israeli entry stamp in their passport. Well, I guess that is their right, as obnoxious as it may be.

We also know that people with non-Islamic articles of faith can also be denied entry. So, in addition to not being able to enter the country with a tallit, or tefillin, Christians are also barred entry if they are wearing a cross or any other object that signifies that they are Christians. Carrying a Christian bible is also a no-no, of course. Even that, I guess, is the right of the Saudis, as distasteful as that may be.

But here comes the kicker. If Delta wants to fly to Saudi Arabia with their aircraft (and they are planning on introducing such service shortly) the Saudis have also stipulated that Jews are not permitted on board, even if, somehow or other, they have proper travel documents. Delta, in response to the concern now being voiced by many people in the US has responded that this is a matter for the US Department of State to deal with and they are not going to comment further on the situation. Really?

How will this be enforced? Can you see the scenario? A Jew with a good neutral name like Smith (and there are plenty of us named Smith, to be sure) succeeds in getting a visa to Saudi Arabia. He taxis to Hartsfield Jackson Airport in Atlanta, walks up to the check-in desk and, in addition to presenting his ticket, passport and visa gets asked “Are you Jewish?” Are you kidding me? In America? In 2011? And the Delta agent responds, when questioned, says “I am just following orders, if you are Jewish we cannot let you on the plane!” Just following order….sounds eerily familiar does it not?

A couple of years ago Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was criticized for saying “It’s 1938 and Iran is Germany.” Well, I don’t want to say its 1938 and America is Germany but we need to make sure that does not turn out to be the case. The loyal customers of Delta Airlines throughout the world should be screaming loud and clear that this is how it all begins and if the airline continues its association with Saudi Arabian Airlines under these conditions, that we will all simply stop flying Delta.

Pastor Friedrich Gustav Emil Martin Niemoller who lived in Germany from 1892-1984 was known for his poem of regret which went something like this:

When the Nazis came for the communists, I did not speak out; as I was not a communist.
When they locked up the social democrats, I did not speak out; I was not a social democrat.
When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out; as I was not a trade unionist.
When they came for the Jews, I did not speak out; as I was not a Jew.
When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out.

The clock is running and the process must be stopped at this stage as it has a tendency, one begun, to creep on and grow. Now is the time to act. If you ever use Delta let them know this is not acceptable in a free society. Please do it now!

2011-06-22T05:01:00.000-07:00

86 Days to Go
Are We Ready for an Attack?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

There are now 86 days to go to the opening of the United Nations General Assembly and the vote on recognizing Palestinian statehood.

No one really knows what will happen the next day but this week in Israel preparations are being made to make the population aware of the need to be ready for a potential attack on all of Israel. Comforting eh?

So at 11 AM this morning sirens sounded throughout the country and those of us in offices were herded to the “safe rooms” built into each building here. In our case our office is located in a 25 year old building which I actually had a hand in designing when it was the headquarters of LUZ, the Israeli solar energy company that, at the time, built nine solar power generating stations in the high desert of California. The building management came around yesterday to advise everyone that it was the law of the land that when the siren sounds everyone is to leave their work places and go downstairs to the safe room.

At 11 AM the sirens dutifully sounded but, regrettably, we did not hear them because we found out that in this Tech Park of close to 50 office buildings, there is no siren and the closest one is too far away for us to hear the sound. Nevertheless, we knew that at 11 AM this is what we had to do, so we went even without hearing the siren.

When we got there we found two things. First, that the room is way too small for the number of people now working in this building, which has been expanded significantly from when it was first built. We had originally designed the building to house 300-350 people and there are now over 500 people working here. In addition, as in many of these safe rooms (or, more accurately, bomb shelters) given the years of calm that we have experienced, the building management has been using the room as a storage facility for all kinds of things, so there is even less room for the people working here than the design capacity. And finally, there are no supplies for a stay as long as even one hour (i.e. no sanitary facilities, no bottled water, etc.).

So, in terms of giving us a feeling that we were somewhat safe and prepared should disaster strike, it was clear to all of us that (a) we will probably not hear the sirens when they are used to alert us to a real emergency, (b) not everyone in the building will be able to fit into the bomb shelter should such a situation develop and (c) the room, sadly, is not equipped with the basic supplies necessary to permit human functioning for more than a few minutes.

What a difference from last night when I was privileged to be at the opening session of the President’s Conference here held at Binyanei Hauma, the national conference center in Jerusalem. There, everything was perfect. The 60 year old facility had been redecorated so that it looked new, service help was in great abundance making sure the 4,000 participants had food and drink at all times, every high tech communications convenience was available for all to use and all of the glitterati were there to see and be seen. I don’t even want to fantasize about the availability of a bomb shelter there to house the participants at any conference.

And that’s the real Israel. The dichotomous conflict between Israel, the high tech wonder with 3,000 tech startups functioning at any one time and Israel, the country that cannot defend itself against all of its neighbors should the need arise nor provide sufficient protection for its citizens should an attack occur.

It is because of that dichotomy that I am so concerned about what happens the day after the UN vote should it actually take place. And it is the inability of some of my critics to see the possibility of disaster in the making that makes me fear for the future. The civilian defense exercise this week is a critical event that will demonstrate to the authorities where our civilian fault lines are located. Let’s hope that these same authorities can address those issues in the next 86 days.

Robertson Davies, a well-respected Canadian writer, journalist and professor who died in 1995 once said “The eye sees only what the mind is prepared to comprehend.” Let’s hope our leadership has 20/20 vision.

2011-06-21T01:35:00.000-07:00

87 Days to Go
Think of it: The United Palestinian Emirates

By Sherwin Pomerantz

In 87 days the United Nations General Assembly’s 2011 session will open in New York, and unless thwarted in the interim, there will be a vote on recognizing Palestinian statehood. At this point in time it looks as if it will pass if it comes to the floor.

Last night, in the interests of hearing an alternative viewpoint, I attended a symposium presented by people who believe that should the vote be in favor of unilateral recognition of Palestinian statehood, the next steps by Israel should be declaring Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria (what is often referred to as the West Bank).

The speakers were well prepared, informed and articulate and in the interests of space I would summarize their points in support of this approach as follows:

• This is a serious alternative that should not be summarily dismissed.
• The argument that the resultant demographics would be a disaster for Israel is not supported by existing studies because, for the most part, they are not credible and fly in the face of standard procedures applied to census taking.
• The Palestinian leadership’s constant rejection of partition, dating back to 1947, and many times thereafter, means that after always refusing that option, it is simply no longer an alternative and should be taken off the table.
• The concept of “winner takes all” does not apply to only one combatant in a conflict between two sides. Had the Arabs won in ’48, ’67, ’73, ’06, etc., they would have claimed sovereignty over all of the land, so why doesn’t that benefit inure to Israel as the winner in all of those engagements?

As always in these discussions, the chasm between theory and application is what makes the decision difficult, if not impossible. The discussants chose not to deal with the practicalities that would have to be addressed as a result of such a decision but chose, instead, to indicate that when Israel did this earlier with the Golan Heights and Jerusalem, while there was opposition among world leaders, in effect, nothing terrible happened as a result. Of course, to assume that this would be the case in 2011 as well is a bit of a jump, but the assumption was there nonetheless. As well, no one discussed what Israel would then do if it found itself, once again, dealing with a minority population that was 1/3 Arab.

The audience, composed primarily of Jerusalemites, mostly religious and originally from Anglo-Saxon countries, was, as expected, supportive of the concept. Never mind the details or what might happen here the day after such a declaration.

But there was one presentation that was more intriguing and seemingly more practical (if one can say that) than all of the others and that was made by Dr. Mordecai Kedar, of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar-Ilan University and who has 25 years of military intelligence experience in the Israel Defense Forces dealing with Arab politics and related subjects. (http://www.biu.ac.il/Besa/mordechai_kedar.html)

His thesis is that Judea and Samaria is an area composed of Arab tribal groups which are centered in seven locations: Hebron, Jericho, Ramallah, Jenin, Nablus, Kalkilya and Tulkarem, each of which has their own customs, operational laws, hierarchy and traditions. He goes on to say that people from one area do not generally move within the West Bank to other areas and rarely intermarry as well.

Given this situation he suggests that these seven regional areas along with Gaza be made into something similar to the United Arab Emirates in the Gulf where each of the emirates are confederated under the flag of the UAE but retain their own individuality. In effect, he is suggesting creating the United Palestinian Emirates (UPE), if you will, but which, unlike the UAE, would not have its elemental parts contiguous to each other. Israel would, under this scenario, control all of the lands outside these eight regional areas which, for Judea and Samaria, would mean that none of the current settlements would need to be abandoned. As to the question of how people would travel, for example, from Ramallah to Jenin given that they would have to go through Israeli controlled territory to do so, Kedar sees this as a “technicality” that can be addressed. Certainly easier said than done.

Would that scenario work? Would the Palestinian Arab leadership accept such an approach? Is there openness on their side to consider an alternative to a contiguous land area? Would having a federated state of separate population enclaves, even with a seat at the UN as the UPE satisfy the craving for independence? Would any leader who agreed to this retain his life after the decision was made? Or would he be seen as having sold his people out to the “other?”

None of us have the answers. What we do know is that most Israelis want peace and are prepared to make sacrifices for it. What we also know is that most Israelis acknowledge that leaving areas formerly held by Israel such as Southern Lebanon and Gaza, has not brought quiet but rather regular attacks (although Southern Lebanon has been relatively quiet since the end of the 2nd Lebanese War). Most Israelis also agree that a Palestinian state on our borders controlling the hills of Judea and Samaria [and their dominance of both the coastal plain and the Jordan Valley] is a potential recipe for disaster. And yet, the majority of Israelis will also say that the only way to peace is two states for two people, side by side in peace and security. With all of these conflicting “givens” it is difficult to see a way out, but the status quo is also not very comforting.

What we need are leaders who understand the need for flexibility. Everett Dirksen, former US Congressman, Senator and later Minority Leader of the Senate, once said “I am a man of fixed and unbending principles, the first of which is to be flexible at all times.” He understood what leadership meant and, sadly, I fear those in power today simply do not understand this need.

2011-06-20T06:24:00.000-07:00

88 Days to Go
Can We Change Our Minds?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

88 days from today will see the opening of the United Nations General Assembly’s 2011 session in New York with the scheduled vote on recognizing Palestinian statehood.

Over the past months many people have voiced their opinions as to what Israel should do about this issue, what needs to be done to bring the parties to a meaningful negotiation, what might happen the day after the vote and whether there should even be any concern about the vote, to name a few of the items being discussed. In the course of these months, some people actually have positions today which differ from what their positions might have been a month, two months or even a year ago. This writer falls into that category as well.

As a result, the public tends to immediately climb all over the columnists and commentators for being wishy-washy in their approach, for waffling in their opinions or for not being consistent in what they advise. So, for example, in the op-ed piece by Tom Friedman that I referenced in yesterday’s blog, some analysts chided him because he urged Israel to sit down with the Palestinian Arab representatives even if those representatives included members of Hamas, whereas some months ago he indicated that it was folly for Israel to even consider meeting with any group committed to the country’s destruction as a Jewish state.

But politics, like life, is fluid and situations change from one day to the next, so it is quite understandable that people’s opinions might also shift. William Seward, the 12th Governor of New York State and US Secretary of State under former presidents Abraham Lincoln and Andrew Johnson once said: “The circumstances of the world are so variable that an irrevocable purpose or opinion is almost synonymous with a foolish one.”

Therefore, people’s positions on critical issues of the day must change to reflect current realities because politics is neither seen as a science (in spite of the name of the course many of us have taken called “Political Science”) nor accorded the status of religion which is generally controlled by dogma. Rather facts change, realities become altered, hardened positions soften, and sometimes people even begin to realize the incredibly negative ramifications of certain approaches which they once thought were inviolate. And for all of that I say thank the Lord that this is the case because it is only the ability to alter our thinking about any particular issue that makes it possible for us to contemplate a brighter future.

In the Middle East, where an excess of political dogma has so greatly contributed to the strife with which we deal every day, for us to move forward people must be capable of changing their minds and not fear being criticized for doing so that we can ensure survival and growth.

There are those who would say I’m a dreamer, an idealist detached from reality, or even someone who does not understand all the nuances of diplomacy. But I would disagree. The easiest thing in the world is to take a position and maintain that position without wavering even in the face of reality and then cover it with the words “this I believe.” What is difficult is to be willing to constantly examine one’s position on a subject and engage in multiple iterations which have the potential to lead us to a solution. Sadly I fear that the political leadership on both sides of the line (green or otherwise) have simply lost their ability to transition to new positions which may, indeed, have the potential to provide a secure and rewarding life for those of us who have chosen to live in this troubled area of the world. And we, who have little control over the outcome of this myopic vision, will pay the price.

2011-06-19T02:46:00.001-07:00

89 Days to Go
Do We Know What we are Doing?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

There are now just 89 days left to the opening of the United Nations General Assembly’s 2011 session in New York and the vote on recognizing Palestinian statehood. To be sure the suggestions as to what to do are flying fast and furious.

What we see in the press and on the blogs generally falls into one of two categories, either (a) people are saying we absolutely must do something and not take a wait and see attitude while (b) others counsel that nothing will happen after the vote anyway so why not just stand on our principles and wait and see what happens next.

Over the last few days I’ve seen three articles that address the dilemma in three distinctly different, but all intelligent, ways.

Lazar Berman, Program Manager for Foreign and Defense Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute, a Washington DC think tank, has penned a piece entitled “Might Israel Know What It’s Doing?” (http://www.american.com/archive/2011/june/might-israel-know-what-it2019s-doing) In the article Berman analyzes a whole series of Israeli strategic moves including reactions to Hizbullah in Lebanon, last May’s attempt to break the blockade of Gaza by the Turkish vessel Marvi Marmara, as well as the Nakba and Naksa demonstrations earlier this spring. His conclusion is that while Israel operates in an atmosphere of “no good options” when it comes to these types of situations, he concludes: “Though its responses often seem haphazard and excessively violent, the long view indicates that Israel’s mix of diplomacy, deterrence and force keeps its citizens safe and minimizes extended bloodshed.”

Rabbi Berel Wein, who operates his Jewish Destiny Foundation from offices both in the US and Israel, had an op-ed in last Friday’s Jerusalem Post entitled “The Status Quo” (http://www.rabbiwein.com/Jerusalem-Post/2011/06/615.html) where he makes the case that Jews have lived with status quo situations for centuries and that there are, as well, plenty of examples of this in modern day Israel as well in areas such as religion, elections, the relationship with the Arab world, to name a few. He takes a current look at the logic of those who say, vis-à-vis the expected occurrences in September, that the status quo cannot continue and concludes by saying: “Over the last twenty years, from Oslo through Gaza, all promises of accomplishments and success have been returned as being empty ones. So maybe the dreaded status quo will have to suffice for us for some time yet into the future. Most of life is status quo. Let us make the most of what is given to us at hand.”

Finally, in yesterday’s New York Times Tom Friedman has a piece entitled “What to Do With Lemons” where he describes both Israel and the Palestinians as “lemons” using the vernacular for automobiles that are always troublesome. In his piece, he suggests that it would be a bad strategy to attempt to maintain the status quo as that is not something that answers anyone’s concerns. (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/opinion/19friedman.html). Rather, he suggests returning to General Assembly Resolution 181 which, in November 1947, partitioned the former Palestine into two homes for two peoples, described at the time as “Independent Arab and Jewish States.” His proposal is to bring this existing resolution (which, presumably, is still binding) to the Security Council and update it by adding that the dividing line should be the 1967 borders (we all know, of course, that those were not borders at all but simply agreed upon armistice lines) with mutually agreed border adjustments and security arrangements for both sides. His position is that this would give an international imprimatur to a situation that both parties understand will be the end game in any event and something that has been more or less understood in all of the past peace negotiations.

So where does that leave us? Yes, Israel probably did know what it was doing in all of the earlier scenarios that Lazar Berman describes in his article. But just because historically we may have come out of the situations he describes relatively unscathed does not mean that this will obtain in the future as well. Those of us living here certainly remember the feeling of helplessness during the 2nd Lebanese War as rockets rained down on the northern half of the country and we were powerless to stop them. So being secure in the knowledge that we may have known what we were doing in the past is no guarantee that similar tactics will work in the present or the future.

As for maintaining the status quo, that generally only makes sense when either (a) all of the variables are under the control of one country or entity or (b) if others are involved, that they agree to this scenario as well. In our current situation it seems quite clear that there are multiple forces at work both within Israel and outside of Israel intent on making sure that the status quo does not continue. While I do, indeed, have great respect for Rabbi Wein’s intellect and commitment to the destiny of the Jewish people (remember he is the only one of the three writers cited who actually lives here), I’m simply not sure that we have the luxury of deciding to maintain the status quo and coming out of this whole.

That leaves us with Tom Friedman’s approach which is to update General Assembly Resolution 181, which is critical given that the original dividing lines were even narrower than the 1967 armistice lines. It is worth reading the op-ed and much of what he says would seem to make sense except, of course, that he does not mention anything about the status of Jerusalem, the refugee issue or the security situation in the Jordan Valley, all of which he lumps into a sentence that ends “the General Assembly urges both sides to enter into negotiations to resolve all the other outstanding issue.” What is really a bit humorous are the two words that follow that sentence, to wit: “Very simple.” Really?

I certainly believe, as the readers of this blog already know, that neither depending on history to repeat itself in our favor or attempting to maintain the status quo are the best choices for us. Tom Friedman actually seems to begin to address the probably in a manner that may have some potential but it still needs to go further in order to give those of us living here sufficient comfort to move ahead in this direction with a partner that has proven to be significantly unreliable over the last 63 years of our existence as a state. It will be interesting to see the reactions to this on both sides.

2011-06-17T07:43:00.000-07:00

91 Days to Go
What Can YOU do?

By Sherwin Pomerantz

With 91 days left to the opening of the United Nations General Assembly’s 2011 session in New York and the General Assembly’s vote on recognizing Palestinian statehood people are asking me, ok, what can we do to help? So here goes, a short list of what I urge us to do.

As I have mentioned before I think it is important that delegates to the UN know how those of us who care about Israel feel about this vote. Some of my readers have already done so but it seems to me that if there would be a groundswell of mail to each and every one of the delegates to the UN in New York that at least it will be obvious to all of them that WE CARE! Attached is a now complete list of every delegation, the name of the Ambassador to the UN from each country as well as the address, and, where available, the fax number and e mail address as well. Please consider doing this and doing it NOW.

The American Jewish Committee has started a petition to be sent to Nicolas Sarkozy of France and David Cameron in the UK urging them to vote no. The petition can be accessed at

http://www.ajc.org/c.ijITI2PHKoG/b.7515195/k.1525/Speak_out_against_Palestinian_unilateralism/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?msource=0611UDI2e

Please consider adding your name to this letter and letting these two important figures know how you feel.

If you believe as I do that Prime Minister Netanyahu is not being aggressive enough in stating Israel’s case and that he needs to pursue additional diplomatic avenues with the Palestinians then you can also write to the Prime Minister and let him know how you feel. You can send an e mail communication to the Prime Minister by going to the following site

http://www.pmo.gov.il/PMOEng/Public+Applications/PublicApplications/

and letting him know how you feel. We are confident that every piece of correspondence submitted in this manner gets read.

Finally it may be time to demonstrate. Our people have a proud history of mounting significant demonstrations in support of issues that we hold dear. Many of you recall the demonstrations in Washington DC some years ago on behalf of Soviet Jewry. In Israel large demonstrations in Rabin Square in Tel Aviv have often forced the government to act. It is beyond me why the people of Israel and our brethren around the world are not more vocal than they are about issues that clearly impact on the survival of this country as a Jewish and democratic state. We should be on the streets telling our governments how we feel.

History has taught us all too often that we cannot put our total faith and trust in others to support us and protect us. In 1944, in the midst of World War II David Ben Gurion, soon to be the first Prime Minister of the new State of Israel said “We must master our fate, we must take destiny into our own hands.” Those words are no less true today than they were 67 years ago when he made that statement. The time to act is NOW! Hopefully we are up to the challenge.

2011-06-15T05:37:00.001-07:00

93 Days to Go
Why I Don’t Think this is Alarmist

By Sherwin Pomerantz

It is now 93 days to the opening of the United Nations General Assembly’s 2011 session in New York and the General Assembly’s vote on recognizing Palestinian statehood.

In this daily countdown to September 14th some of my readers have expressed the opinion that my actions in doing this are alarmist in nature. Others have said that nothing will happen the next day in any event, so why the big concern? Of course, given that I am writing this every day, I beg to differ. Permit me to explain.

We here in Israel have a problem. We live in a hostile neighborhood with:

• Some countries seemingly bent on our destruction or elimination (e.g. Iran and Lebanon [under Hizbullah]);
• Other countries using the unresolved Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a diversion from their own problems (e.g. Syria);
• A whole host of nations in the region in political transition with forces not so friendly to us poised to take power (e.g. Egypt, Yemen, Libya);
• A former ally (Turkey) whose Islamist leadership is moving away from the West and more to the East;
• And others whose long term intentions are also not so clear (e.g. Jordan, Saudi Arabia).

In addition we have next door neighbors (i.e. the Palestinian Arabs) who on the one hand talk about their interest in a two state solution for this area while simultaneously agreeing to a reconciliation pact with an entity that is avowedly out to destroy us (i.e.. Hamas) and who is still unilaterally pursuing a recognition vote in the UN which most democratic government leaders around the world believe will not lead to peace.

We all know that problems don’t disappear. If we don’t confront them, they may hide for awhile, but sooner or later they will re-appear. Eventually we will be forced to face them and take some action. Whether that action is in the form of solving the problem or accepting it is not important, but rather that we consciously come to a decision about what we are going to do. It is that decision that gives us the ability to again move forward in our lives with added strength and the possibility of happiness. And it is because I don’t see our government consciously coming to such decisions that I am writing this daily blog.

Nobody has any idea about what will happen after September 14th. That is a given. But we do not live in a sea of tranquility. Even the comfort zone we developed for ourselves over the last 18 years since Oslo no longer exists. To act that because the economy is doing well, unemployment is low, quality of life is high and Israel did not suffer unduly from the last economic crisis nothing bad can happen to us is simply a case of Israel believing the lies we tell ourselves. That is a recipe for disaster.

Most of you who get this read the papers so I needn’t list here all of the possibilities that could confront us over the next year. You know about the fear of having our borders overrun with protestors from neighboring countries, the concern that if rockets started raining down on us from every side we cannot protect ourselves from the damage, the difficulties we would face if another intifada broke out in the Palestinian Arab community to name a few. Therefore, as responsible citizens rightfully concerned about our future and that of our children and grandchildren who live here along with the negative effect on world Jewry should Israel falter, we must decide to confront the problem personally while we simultaneously hope that we can goad our government into doing the same.

If as a result of all of this, people see this concern as alarmist, I will accept that accusation. As many of you know I am a traditionally observant Jew and I project to the time, after 120 years, when I stand before my maker and am asked to make an accounting of my deeds. And in that vein I am told “I gave you a brain and a pen and when Israel was in trouble, did you use it?” I want that answer to be a resounding “yes.”

This is one of those times in history when, once again, our people stand threatened. In other times we did not act and we paid the price. We cannot be guilty of that again so, yes, I am ringing the alarms! Let us hope that sometime in the near future we will all look back on this and say it was unnecessary, but as we have no way of knowing that, we simply cannot take the risk of inaction. The price of inaction is simply too high.