Congressmen show their anti-Saudi sentiment
James Zogby
* Last Updated: July 23. 2009 11:14PM UAE / July 23. 2009 7:14PM GMT
While Jon Kyl, a Republican from Arizona, ranks as the most anti-Arab member of the US Senate, honours in the House of Representatives go to Anthony Weiner, a New York Democrat.
Over the years, Mr Weiner has sponsored a host of anti-Arab amendments. On one day alone in July 2007 he set a record of sorts by introducing seven initiatives directed against Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the Palestinians and the Arab Bank, which operates in 30 countries.
Most of these efforts have no co-sponsors, are vigorously opposed and usually fail to attract attention (except by the congressman’s donor base, for which they are intended in the first place).
On occasion, however, Mr Weiner has been able to amend an existing bill, call for a voice vote and, largely because of the pervasive anti-Arab bias on Capitol Hill, get one of his efforts passed.
Last week witnessed one of Mr Weiner’s victories. It was against the US-Saudi relationship.
For three years now he has successfully amended the foreign operations budget to forbid any US aid to Saudi Arabia unless the president determines that the aid is important for US national security interests. Despite the fact that Saudi Arabia receives no US aid – except for a few hundred thousand in the foreign operations bill that supports US-Saudi joint antiterrorism efforts – Congress supported Mr Weiner’s efforts in 2007 and 2008.
This year Mr Weiner took his measure one step further by forbidding the aid and removing the presidential waiver provision so that, in Mr Weiner’s words, “what we want to do here is tie the president’s hands to finally live up to what this Congress has said, which is not a dollar, not a shekel, not a pound, not a dime going to the Saudi Arabians of our tax dollars. Enough is enough … No money.”
Worth noting is the congressman’s use of the word “shekels” and then “pounds”.
I am reminded of a debate I had once with Mr Weiner on CNN’s Crossfire. Israel had just bombed a home in Gaza and killed 15 people. When asked by the host how this could be justified, Mr Weiner responded that it was unfortunate. But then he added: “Sometimes we have to do this.”
The “we” was duly noted by the show’s hosts and audience.
Mr Weiner’s anti-Saudi amendment passed by a 297-135 vote, sending the message from Congress that it does not support US-Saudi antiterrorism co-operation.
Fair and Balanced?
Efforts by Barack Obama, the US president, to apply equal pressure to all sides to adhere to the conditions of the Israeli-Palestinian road map and take the steps to advance the peace process may be undercut by some members of Congress who, it appears, want to conduct their own foreign policy.
There is a “dear colleague” letter being circulated on the Hill by two members of the House of Representatives from California, Brad Sherma, a Democrat, and Ed Royce, a Republican.
Addressed to King Abdullah, the letter notes Mr Obama’s call to Arab states “to live up to their responsibility and recognise Israeli legitimacy”.
The letter then expresses disappointment with the fact that the Saudi government has yet to act to “break down barriers between Arabs and Israelis”.
The congressmen call on King Abdullah to “step forward with a dramatic gesture towards Israel”.
Messrs Sherman and Royce have yet to circulate a letter to Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, calling on him to stop settlements, remove outposts ...
///
U.S. Lawmakers Call On Saudi King To Step Up
August 2, 2009
Washington
JTA Wire Service
A letter urging Saudi King Abdullah to “assert a strong leadership role” in the Middle East is gathering signatures in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The AIPAC-backed letter, circulated by Reps. Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) and Ed Royce (D-Calif.), expresses disappointment with the Saudi government’s public reaction thus far to President Obama’s Cairo speech, noting that the Saudi foreign minister recently said that his country could not “take any step toward normalization before the return of all Arab land.”
“We urge you to assert a strong leadership role and help lead the Middle East to a new era of peace and reconciliation by stepping forward with a dramatic gesture toward Israel,” such as the late Egyptian President Anwar Sadat’s visit to Jerusalem, states the letter. So far, 108 members of the House had signed on to the missive.
In another development, Americans for Peace Now is urging U.S. senators not to sign a letter encouraging the Arab world to normalize ties with Israel because it does not mention efforts to halt Israeli settlements.
The bipartisan letter to President Obama, circulated by Sens. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) and James Risch (R-Idaho) and backed by the pro-Israel lobby AIPAC, is “unhelpful” because it “seems to make a straightforward and reasonable demand for the Arab world to normalize relations with Israel,” but “the subtext of the letter directly contradicts and undermines the efforts” of the Obama administration “to promote Middle East peace.”
The Senate letter notes that “over the past few months Israel has taken concrete measures to reaffirm its commitment to advancing the peace process,” and notes Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s backing of the two-state solution and the removal of roadblocks and other measures to “improve the daily lives of Palestinians.”
But “the Bayh/Risch letter conspicuously ignores Israel’s continued refusal to stop settlement activity” and “never even once mentions the word ‘settlements,’ ” states the Americans for Peace Now letter. “It sends a message that signers consider settlements more important than peace.”
The Bayh-Risch letter asks Obama what steps he is encouraging Arab states to take to “demonstrate their commitment to the peace process,” and suggests examples such as meeting openly with Israeli officials or opening trade relations with the Jewish state, as well as ending “official propaganda campaigns which demonize Israel and Jews.”
This story reprinted courtesy of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
///
Rabbis Arrested in N.J. Sting
July 27, 2009
Washington
JTA Wire Service
Several rabbis were arrested as part of a public corruption and international money-laundering investigation in New Jersey.
According to reports, among the 44 people arrested Thursday morning by the FBI along with the rabbis were the mayors of three New Jersey towns, a deputy mayor and a state assemblyman. They were to appear in federal court in Newark later in the day.
The money-laundering suspects were accused of moving “at least tens of millions of dollars through charitable, nonprofit entities controlled by rabbis in New York and New Jersey,” according to a release by acting U.S. Attorney Ralph Marra.
Prosecutors said they worked with an informant who had been charged with bank fraud in May 2006, Bloomberg.com said. Investigators obtained hundreds of hours of audio and video recordings, according to prosecutors.
The rabbis arrested were religious leaders from Syrian Jewish neighborhoods in Deal and Elberon, N.J., as well as Brooklyn, N.Y. The Asbury Park Press reported that the investigation involved the Deal Yeshiva, a Sephardic institution that has a boys’ division in Ocean Township and a girls’ school in West Long Branch.
The arrests reportedly are the result of a two-year probe by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Internal Revenue Service that began with an investigation of money transfers by members of the Syrian enclaves in Deal and Brooklyn, two tight-knit and wealthy communities.
The Monmouth County Prosecutor’s Office and the IRS removed at least three boxes from the Deal Yeshiva as students were arriving at school Thursday, The Star-Ledger reported, as well as severalboxes from the Ohel Yaacob synagogue in the same town.
The charged rabbis include Rabbi Saul Kassin, 87, of the Sharee Zion synagogue in Brooklyn, N.Y.; Eliahu Ben Haim, 58, the principal rabbi of Congregation Ohel Yaacob in Deal; Edmond Nahum, 56, of the Deal Synagogue; Mordchai Fish, 56, of Congregation Sheves Achim in Brooklyn; and Lavel Schwartz, 57, Fish’s brother. They were charged with money laundering.
Kassin is accused of laundering more than $200,000 through the informant from June 2007 through December 2008, according to prosecutors. Fish, Schwartz and two other defendants used a charitable, tax-exempt organization called BCG, which was associated with Fish’s synagogue, to launder money, according to the FBI.
The mayors of Hoboken, Ridgefield and Secaucus, the deputy mayor of Jersey City and an assemblyman from Ocean Township were caught in the operation.
Also charged is Levy-Izhak Rosenbaum, 58, of Brooklyn, who was accused of conspiring with others to acquire and trade human organs for use in transplantation. In one case noted in the complaint, Rosenbaum said it would cost $150,000—half up front. Rosenbaum said some of the money would go to the donor and some to doctors in Israel, according to the complaint.
Bloomberg identified the cooperating witness as Solomon Dwek, a real estate developer in Monmouth County, N.J. who was charged in 2006 with scheming to defraud PNC Bank out of $50 million, according to a person familiar with the matter and court records.
Dwek was never indicted; he has received 17 extensions to continue the period in which his case had to be presented to a federal grand jury.
This story reprinted courtesy of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
///
Former Top U.S. Diplomat Meets With Hamas
July 26, 2009
Washington
JTA Wire Service
A former senior U.S. diplomat met with two senior officials of Hamas.
Thomas Pickering, who served as U.S. ambassador to Israel and the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, met with Bassem Naim and Mahmoud al-Zahar in Switzerland last month, the Washington Post reported.
Also, four members of the fervently Orthodox group Neturei Karta met with Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh in Gaza. The Neturei Karta does not recognize the State of Israel.
As to the meeting between Hamas and Pickering, who also served as undersecretary of state for political affairs, U.S. officials said Pickering had no official standing and that he had scheduled it on his own. The officials told the Post they learned of the meeting after it happened.
The meeting occurred after President Obama’s June 4 Cairo speech but before a June 25 speech by Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal in which he praised the president’s “new language” toward the group.
Naim told the Post he hoped the meeting would be “the beginning of addressing some of the mistakes of the last three years. This was a first meeting to investigate the positions in general terms of both parties without any commitment on any side.”
U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton reiterated that Hamas must “recognize Israel and renounce violence and agree to abide by prior agreements” before the United States will deal with the group.
The Neturei Karta group arrived in Gaza through its border with Egypt along with a convoy of aid and international activists. Haniyeh called the Jewish activists “heroes,” telling the Palestinian Ma’an News Agency, “Those religious figures that express their objection to the siege, the aggression and the crimes—we can’t help but respect them and for their beliefs and their culture.”
This story reprinted courtesy of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
///
County Police Team Up With Synagogues
Baltimore County police seek out synagogues for a database of critical facilities.
July 24, 2009
Barbara Pash
Associate Editor
County Police Team Up With Synagogues
A program to build a database of information for critical facilities is under way in Maryland and Baltimore County is the first county to implement the program — the Constellation/Automated Critical Asset Management System (C/ACAMS).
As part of the effort, the county’s police department has initiated an outreach to synagogues.
So far, Beth El Congregation is participating and, at a meeting last week at Temple Oheb Shalom, Ken Davidson, its executive director, sat with the two county police officers in charge to learn more about the program.
Because of the size of the Jewish community and the number of synagogues, Detective Frederick Carter Jr. of the county police’s Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Management said including information from them is a priority for the program. Eventually, the goal is to have information from other Jewish institutions and facilities in the county as well.
The Los Angeles Police Department founded and piloted C/ACAMS. It has since been implemented in 33 states and all 50 states are expected to eventually participate. In 2005, Baltimore County obtained a grant from the federal Department of Homeland Security to begin the program which, after a few years of training, was launched here in 2008.
“After 9/11, the idea was to build a database for first-responders,” Mr. Carter said. On the local level, “this information is for police and fire departments to have as a response tool in case of an emergency.”
Mr. Carter started the county program by following federal and state lists of critical facilities. But he has also created his own list of local critical facilities.
Participation in C/ACAMS is voluntary. Those who choose to participate fill out an online questionnaire with as much detail as they want. Typical questions ask for emergency contact names and phone numbers, size of the building, hours of operation and number of occupants.
In addition, information in the form of floor plans, electrical systems, locations of generators, diagrams, maps, evacuation plans and security procedures can be inputted into the database.
In the program, one person at each facility is designated the C/ACAMS “manager,” responsible for keeping the information updated and also receiving periodic e-mails about the program.
Said Oheb Shalom’s Mr. Davidson: “The program is good for us because first-responders will have that information. For example, [in case of an emergency] we have a ‘safe room’ for the preschool. Right now, I am the only person who has that information. Someone besides me should know where it is and how to access it.”
Maj. Jeffrey Caslin of the county police’s Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Management also attended the meeting with Mr. Davidson. He said Baltimore County’s C/ACAMS had 350 sites in its database, a combination of the federal, state and local lists.
The local list includes county government agencies, schools, businesses, shopping centers and financial institutions.
“The feeling was, if something happened to T. Rowe Price, that would affect the entire county,” said Mr. Caslin.
Only one company has declined to be included in the county’s list. “They said they thought it was a good program. But their lawyer told them to pass” for computer security reasons, he said.
Henry Tyrangiel has been working with the county police to introduce them to the synagogue administrators. Mr. Tyrangiel is head of Computerized Management Systems Inc., a Pikesville company that installs and monitors sophisticated security systems. For example, the company worked with Chizuk Amuno Congregation to establish an indoor and outdoor security system.
“We’ve worked with county police for quite some time” on security systems, said Mr. Tyrangiel, although not in an official capacity. He calls C/ACAMS a “first step in preparedness. It tells you where the fire exits are, the emergency exits.” Mr. Tyrangiel said he believes congregations need to go further to secure their facilities.
Around the state, C/ACAMS is “still in its infancy,” said Mr. Caslin. The Baltimore City Police Department is currently being trained on the program. In his opinion, the city would likely start with the critical facilities lists from the federal and state governments before identifying its own city list.
In addition, Prince George’s and Montgomery counties are starting to work on their own C/ACAMS.
Mr. Caslin estimated that it might take five years before Baltimore County’s C/ACAMS list is complete. He said that other religious institutions have not been approached to participate in the program.
“We see the synagogues as a priority,” he said and, from the reception the county police have received so far, “they seem to be interested.”
For information about C/ACAMS, contact Maj. Jeffrey Caslin at 410-887-5672.
///
Why Won’t Obama Talk to Israel?
Aluf Benn
The New York Times (Opinion)
July 27, 2009 - 12:00am
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/28/opinion/28benn.html?_r=1&ref=opinion
IN his global tours and TV appearances, President Obama has spoken to Arabs, Muslims, Iranians, Western Europeans, Eastern Europeans, Russians and Africans. His words have stirred emotions and been well received everywhere.
But he hasn’t bothered to speak directly to Israelis.
And the effect? Six months into his presidency, Israelis find themselves increasingly suspicious of Mr. Obama. All they see is American pressure on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to freeze settlements, a request that’s been interpreted here as political arm-twisting meant to please the Arab street at Israel’s expense — or simply to express the president’s dislike for Mr. Netanyahu.
This would seem counterproductive, given the importance the president has placed on resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. If Israel is part of the problem, it’s also part of the solution. Yet so far, neither the president nor any senior administration official has given a speech or an interview aimed at an Israeli audience, beyond brief statements made at diplomatic photo ops.
The Arabs got the Cairo speech; we got silence.
This policy of ignoring Israel carries a price. Though Mr. Obama has succeeded in prodding Mr. Netanyahu to accept the idea of a Palestinian state alongside Israel, he has failed to induce Israel to impose a freeze on settlements. In fact, he has failed even to stir debate about the merits of one: no Israeli political figure has stood up to Mr. Netanyahu and begged him to support Mr. Obama; not even the Israeli left, desperate for a new agenda, has adopted Mr. Obama as its icon.
As a result, Mr. Netanyahu enjoys a virtual domestic consensus over his rejection of the settlement freeze. Moreover, he has succeeded in portraying Mr. Obama as a shaky ally. In Mr. Netanyahu’s narrative, the president has fallen under the influence of top aides — in this case Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod — whom the prime minister has called “self-hating Jews.” Meanwhile, Mr. Netanyahu is the defender of national glory in face of unfair pressure, someone who sticks to the first commandment of Israeli culture: thou shalt never be the freier (that is, the dupe).
So far, Israelis have embraced Mr. Netanyahu’s message. A Jerusalem Post poll of Israeli Jews last month indicated that only 6 percent of those surveyed considered the Obama administration to be pro-Israel, while 50 percent said that its policies are more pro-Palestinian than pro-Israeli. Less scientifically: Israeli rightists have — in columns, articles and public statements — taken to calling the president by his middle name, Hussein, as proof of his pro-Arab tendencies.
What went wrong? Several explanations come to mind.
First, in the 16 rosy years of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, Israelis became spoiled by unfettered presidential attention. Memories of State Department “Arabists” leading American policy in the Middle East were erased. The White House coordinated its policy with Jerusalem, and stayed out of the way when Israel embarked on controversial military offensives in Lebanon and Gaza. This approach infuriated America’s Arab and European allies, which blamed Washington for one-sidedness — something they were willing to forgive of Bill Clinton but not of George W. Bush.
Mr. Obama came to office determined to repair America’s broken alliances in Europe and the Middle East. One way to do this — to prove that he was the opposite of his predecessor — was to place some distance between Israel and himself.
Second, Mr. Obama’s quest for diplomacy has appeared to Israelis as dangerous American naïveté. The president offered a hand to the Iranians, and got nothing, merely giving them more time to advance their nuclear program. In Israeli eyes, he was humiliated by North Korea’s nuclear and missile tests. And he failed to move Arab governments to take steps to normalize relations with Israel. Conclusion: Mr. Obama is a softie, eager to please his listeners and avoid confrontation with anyone who is not Mr. Netanyahu.
Third, Mr. Obama seems to have confused American Jews with Israelis. We are close emotionally and politically, but we are different. We speak Hebrew and not English, we live in the Middle East and have separate historical narratives. Mr. Obama’s stop at Buchenwald and his strong rejection of Holocaust denial, immediately after his Cairo speech, appealed to American Jews but fell flat in Israel. Here we are taught that Zionist determination and struggle — not guilt over the Holocaust — brought Jews a homeland. Mr. Obama’s speech, which linked Israel’s existence to the Jewish tragedy, infuriated many Israelis who sensed its closeness to the narrative of enemies like Mahmoud Ahmedinejad.
Fourth, as far as most Israelis are concerned, Mr. Obama has made a mistake in focusing on a settlement freeze. For starters, mainstream Israelis rarely have anything to do with the settlements; many have no idea where they are, even when they’re a half-hour’s drive from Tel Aviv.
More important: in the past decade, repeated peace negotiations and diplomatic statements have indicated that larger, closer-to-home settlements (the “settlement blocs”) will remain in Israeli hands under any two-state solution. Why, then, insist on a total freeze everywhere? And why deny with such force — as the administration did — the existence of previous understandings between the United States and Israel over limited settlement construction? There is simply too much evidence proving that such an understanding existed. To Israelis, the claim undermined Mr. Obama’s credibility — and strengthened Mr. Netanyahu’s position.
Perhaps there are good reasons behind Mr. Obama’s Middle East policy. Perhaps the settlement freeze is in Israel’s best interest. Perhaps the president is truly committed to Israel’s long-term security and well-being. Perhaps his popularity in the Arab street is the missing ingredient of peacemaking.
But until the president talks to us, we won’t know. Next time you’re in the neighborhood, Mr. President, speak to us directly. We will surely listen.
///
Jewish leaders seek more pressure on Palestinians, Arab states
Ron Kampeas
Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA)
July 27, 2009 - 12:00am
http://jta.org/news/article/2009/07/27/1006809/jewish-leaders-want-to-see-more-p...
Any good therapist will tell you: There’s pressure that hurts and there’s pressure that heals.
Two weeks after President Obama promised more of the latter, establishment Jewish groups are still squirming -- complaining that the pressure on Israel is unrelenting, while pressure on Arabs and the Palestinians has yet to kick in.
Jewish leaders, who reached out to JTA to describe in greater detail their White House meeting with the president on July 13, say they see progress, but are concerned that an imbalance persists.
During the meeting, the leaders say, Obama said he had written to Arab leaders to press them on gestures that would allow Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to reciprocate with similar concessions, including a settlement freeze.
Obama said he would follow up with phone calls, but more than a week later there are no signs that the outreach is making inroads. Instead, reports have leaked that the Saudis, in particular, are adamant that Netanyahu must move first.
Of greater concern, according to participants in the meeting, is that despite the president's acknowledgment that he needed to do more to ameliorate the perception that he was pressuring only Israel, Obama kept apologizing for the Arab “street.”
Multiple times during the conversation, Obama said Arab and Palestinian leaders were “terrified” of their street. Jewish leaders at the meeting -- including, notably, Lee Rosenberg, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s president-elect and a major backer of Obama during the presidential campaign -- pushed back, saying that Netanyahu also was accountable to a skeptical public.
Leaders emphasized that overall, the meeting was positive. They said Obama showed engagement and depth, and had a clear understanding of the threat posed by Iran and demonstrated a commitment to isolating the Islamic Republic until it stood down from its suspected nuclear weapons program.
That said, much of the meeting dealt with matters of tone and whether Obama was making it harder for Netanyahu by openly pressing him. At one point, Obama grabbed the arm of Rahm Emanuel, his chief of staff whose father is Israeli, and said, “Don’t think that we don’t understand the nuances of the settlement issues. We do. We understand there is a profound political edge to Israeli politics. But Rahm understands the politics there and he explains them to me.”
Especially frustrating for the leaders were Obama’s specific expectations of Israel -- pre-eminently the settlement freeze -- as opposed to how he used vagaries to describe his expectations of Arabs and the Palestinians.
“Everyone understands how to measure compliance with a demand to ‘freeze’ all settlement activity,” Abraham Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League who attended the meeting, wrote in a blog post appearing over the weekend on the Huffington Post Web site. “But there is simply no way to objectively calculate improving and extending ‘positive actions on security’ or acting ‘forcefully against incitement’ or refraining ‘from any action that would make meaningful negotiations less likely.’ There is no way to quantify the ‘steps’ Arab states should take ‘to improve relations with Israel’ or ‘prepare their publics to embrace peace and accept Israel.’ ”
During the meeting, Foxman challenged Obama to respond directly to Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Authority president, who recently told The Washington Post that Palestinians need do nothing for now, as the Obama administration presses Israel to freeze settlement construction.
“Good point,” was all Obama would say.
Abbas’ wait-and-see approach vexed not only the centrist pro-Israel establishment, but also dovish activists who generally back the Obama administration’s tough posture with Israel.
“They say more things that serve the cause of peace than they don’t,” Ori Nir of Americans for Peace Now said, describing the moderate Palestinian leadership. “But when they say things that don't serve the cause of peace, that are damaging, they should be called on it. We're dealing with two peoples who have grown a lot of scar tissue in the past two or three decades.”
Jeremy Ben-Ami, who directs J Street, said the recalcitrance on both sides underscored the need for an active U.S. role in the process.
“It is unhelpful for anybody to only talk about what one side can do,” said Ben-Ami, who was at the White House meeting. “It is unhelpful for people to say all the obligations are on Israel's side, on the Palestinians’ side.”
Within two days of the meeting with Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton was delivering a speech to the Council on Foreign Affairs that emphasized expectations of the Palestinians and the Arabs, albeit in the non-specific terms that frustrated many of the Jewish leaders at the White House meeting. Notably, too, her comments on Palestinians were missing from the prepared text and appeared to have been inserted at the last minute.
“The Palestinians have the responsibility to improve and extend the positive actions already taken on security,” Clinton said, “to act forcefully against incitement; and to refrain from any action that would make meaningful negotiations less likely. And Arab states have a responsibility to support the Palestinian Authority with words and deeds, to take steps to improve relations with Israel, and to prepare their publics to embrace peace and accept Israel’s place in the region.”
AIPAC is working through the Congress to redress what it sees as the White House’s imbalance: U.S. Sens. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) and James Risch (R-Idaho) are circulating among their colleagues a letter, strongly backed by the pro-Israel lobby, that would press Obama to lean more on the Arab nations.
“Such steps,” the letter states, “could include ending the Arab League boycott of Israel, meeting openly with Israeli officials, establishing open trade relations with Israel, issuing visas to Israeli citizens, and inviting Israelis to participate in academic and professional conferences and sporting events.”
The letter praises Netanyahu for reiterating Israeli support for two states and for easing movement for the Palestinians. It makes no mention of the U.S. calls for a settlement freeze, essentially staying out of the fight on that issue between the Obama administration and the Netanyahu government.
James Zogby, the president of the Arab American Institute, challenged the logic of the letter, saying it is Netanyahu’s pressing forward on expanding some settlements that has frustrated Arab willingness to make some of the gestures for which Bayh and Risch are calling.
A number of Arabs nations ready to step forward are now more reluctant in the wake of Netanyahu’s declaration last week that he will not block expanded Jewish settlement in Jerusalem, Zogby said.
Zogby said that the message from his organization to Arab governments is, “Even if this is something you are loath to do, it is not a question of supporting Benjamin Netanyahu, it is a question of supporting Barack Obama's initiative.”
Zogby bristled at the pressure on the Palestinians, in particular, particularly because he sees Israel trucking with terrorist groups while ignoring moderates.
“Hezbollah got the prisoner exchange, Hamas gets negotiations” on a prisoner exchange, Zogby said. “Where are the benefits” to Abbas, he asked. “If you want the Palestinian Authority to be strong, give them the tools to be strong.”
///
Senators want Obama to press Arabs
Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA)
July 27, 2009 - 12:00am
http://jta.org/news/article/2009/07/26/1006786/senators-want-obama-to-press-arab...
Two U.S. senators, a Democrat and a Republican, are circulating a letter pressing President Obama to lean on Arab nations to make peace overtures to Israel.
"Such steps could include ending the Arab League boycott of Israel, meeting openly with Israeli officials, establishing open trade relations with Israel, issuing visas to Israeli citizens, and inviting Israelis to participate in academic and professional conferences and sporting events," said the letter from Sens. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) and James Risch (R-Idaho), circulated July 23 for co-signatories. "We also believe that Arab states must immediately and permanently end official propaganda campaigns which demonize Israel and Jews."
The letter praises what it says have been Israel's overtures, including Netanyahu's reiteration of Israel's backing for a two-state solution and his easing of some travel conditions in the West Bank, although it avoids mention of a settlement freeze, a component that Obama's aides say they need in order to entice Arab leaders.
///
Senators want Obama to press Arabs
Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA)
July 27, 2009 - 12:00am
http://jta.org/news/article/2009/07/26/1006786/senators-want-obama-to-press-arab...
Two U.S. senators, a Democrat and a Republican, are circulating a letter pressing President Obama to lean on Arab nations to make peace overtures to Israel.
"Such steps could include ending the Arab League boycott of Israel, meeting openly with Israeli officials, establishing open trade relations with Israel, issuing visas to Israeli citizens, and inviting Israelis to participate in academic and professional conferences and sporting events," said the letter from Sens. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) and James Risch (R-Idaho), circulated July 23 for co-signatories. "We also believe that Arab states must immediately and permanently end official propaganda campaigns which demonize Israel and Jews."
The letter praises what it says have been Israel's overtures, including Netanyahu's reiteration of Israel's backing for a two-state solution and his easing of some travel conditions in the West Bank, although it avoids mention of a settlement freeze, a component that Obama's aides say they need in order to entice Arab leaders.
///
AIPAC-backed letter gets 329 House signatures
Jewish Telegraphic Agency (JTA)
May 28, 2009 - 12:00am
http://jta.org/news/article/2009/05/28/1005474/aipac-backed-letter-gets-329-hous...
More than three-quarters of the House of Representatives signed an AIPAC-backed letter to President Obama on Middle East peace.
The document, signed by 329 members of Congress, calls for "every effort" to be made to realize an Arab-Israeli peace while laying out certain "basic principles" to achieve it.
Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) spearheaded the letter since its introduction earlier this month. A similar letter in the U.S. Senate garnered 76 signatures.
Among the principles laid out by the House letter is that "the parties themselves must negotiate the details of any agreement" and that the United States must "work closely with our democratic ally, who will be taking the greatest risks in any peace agreement."
"The proven best way forward is to work closely and privately together both on areas of agreement and especially on areas of disagreement," states the missive, adding that the U.S. must be both "a trusted mediator and a devoted friend to Israel."
The letter also insists on an "absolute Palestinian commitment to end violence, terror and incitement" and urges "far greater involvement and participation by the Arab states both in moving toward normal ties with Israel and in supporting moderate Palestinians."
Twenty-nine of the 31 Jewish members of the House signed the letter; Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) and Bob Filner (D-Calif.) were the two who did not.
///
\
AIPAC delegates to lobby for two-state solution
Hilary Leila Krieger
The Jerusalem Post
May 4, 2009 - 12:00am
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1239710853298&pagename=JPost%2FJPArti...
While Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is refusing to explicitly endorse a two-state solution to resolve the Palestinian conflict, participants at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee Policy Conference will this week be urging their elected representatives to press President Barack Obama for precisely that.
The pro-Israel advocacy group's annual conference culminates each year with a mass lobbying effort, in which the thousands of participants from across the United States spread out across Capitol Hill for meetings with their respective members of Congress and encourage them to endorse policies and positions that AIPAC believes will advance the American-Israeli interest.
In this year's lobbying effort, to take place on Tuesday, the AIPAC thousands will be asking their congressmen to sign on to a letter addressed to Obama that explicitly posits the need for a "viable Palestinian state."
It is expected that the overwhelming majority of the congressmen will sign it.
Netanyahu has been aware of the letter's content for some time, according to his senior adviser, Ron Dermer.
Dermer said that despite the letter's language, the important issue was that of underlying policy.
"On the substance, I don't think there's a difference in our position and the position of AIPAC," he said.
It is understood that the letter is being advanced despite its discrepancy with the prime minister's stated positions, because its content reflects both longstanding American policy and longstanding AIPAC positions.
The idea is that the letter would form a bridge between US and Israeli views on the diplomatic process at a time when neither country is looking to provoke arguments despite having different perspectives.
Furthermore, it is being noted here that Netanyahu has made plain that his government will honor previous agreements, which include the road map with its specific framework for a path to Palestinian statehood.
It is not known whether Netanyahu will publicly endorse a two-state solution when he meets here on May 18 with Obama, but it is widely assumed that, privately at least, he will make plain to Obama his government's commitment to previous accords.
Several versions of the letter are included in the kits being given out to participants in this week's AIPAC conference.
One version, bearing a "United States Senate" letterhead, addressed to Obama, and left open for signature, states: "We must also continue to insist on the absolute Palestinian commitment to ending terrorist violence and to building the institutions necessary for a viable Palestinian state living side-by-side, in peace with the Jewish state of Israel."
This version also gives explicit support for programs such as the US-supervised training of Palestinian Authority security forces.
"The more capable and responsible Palestinian forces become, the more they demonstrate the ability to govern and to maintain security, the easier it will be for [the Palestinians] to reach an accord with Israel," it states.
"We encourage you to continue programs similar to the promising security assistance and training programs led by Lieutenant-General Keith Dayton, and hope that you will look for other ways to improve Palestinian security and civilian infrastructure."
A second, similar version, also addressed to Obama and signed by staunchly pro-Israel Majority Leader Stony Hoyer and Republican Whip Eric Cantor, sets out a series of "basic principles" that, if adhered to, offer "the best way to achieve future success between Israelis and Palestinians."
Among the principles cited is the requirement for the two parties to directly negotiate the details of any agreement, the imperative for the US government to serve as "both a trusted mediator and a devoted friend to Israel," and the need for Arab states to move toward normal ties with Israel and to support "moderate Palestinians."
The clause that discusses statehood demands "an absolute Palestinian commitment to end violence, terror, and incitement and to build the institutions necessary for a viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace with the Jewish state of Israel inside secure borders."
It continues: "Once terrorists are no longer in control of Gaza and as responsible Palestinian forces become more capable of demonstrating the ability to govern and to maintain security, an accord with Israel will be easier to attain."
A third version of the letter, addressed to their colleagues, is signed by Senators Christopher Dodd, Arlen Specter, Johnny Isakson and John Thune.
It states that "we must redouble our efforts to eliminate support for terrorist violence and strengthen the Palestinian institutions necessary for the creation of a viable Palestinian state living side-by-side, in peace with Israel."
Netanyahu chose not to attend this week's AIPAC conference in part because a Washington visit now would have included, as its central element, talks at the White House with Obama, and Netanyahu preferred to defer that meeting by another two weeks in order to complete his ongoing foreign policy review.
Instead, the prime minister will address the AIPAC delegates by satellite on Monday. Hoyer and Cantor are set to address the same session.
President Shimon Peres is attending the Washington conference in Netanyahu's stead, and will speak on Monday along with Vice President Joseph Biden. Peres will meet with Obama at the White House on Tuesday.
Netanyahu has long indicated that his concerns about Palestinian statehood are practical, rather than ideological - arising from the fear that a fully sovereign Palestinian state might abuse its sovereignty to forge alliances, import arms and build an offensive military capability to threaten Israel.
Aides to the prime minister have also argued in recent days that it is unreasonable to demand that Israel formally endorse statehood for the Palestinian people when the Palestinian leadership is emphatically opposed to recognizing Israel as the state of the Jewish people.
The Hoyer-Cantor letter opens by acknowledging the "formidable" obstacles to peace, but endorses Obama's position "that every effort should be made to try to realize that peace at the soonest possible time."
///
AIPAC delegates to lobby for two-state solution
Hilary Leila Krieger
The Jerusalem Post
May 4, 2009 - 12:00am
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1239710853298&pagename=JPost%2FJPArti...
While Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is refusing to explicitly endorse a two-state solution to resolve the Palestinian conflict, participants at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee Policy Conference will this week be urging their elected representatives to press President Barack Obama for precisely that.
The pro-Israel advocacy group's annual conference culminates each year with a mass lobbying effort, in which the thousands of participants from across the United States spread out across Capitol Hill for meetings with their respective members of Congress and encourage them to endorse policies and positions that AIPAC believes will advance the American-Israeli interest.
In this year's lobbying effort, to take place on Tuesday, the AIPAC thousands will be asking their congressmen to sign on to a letter addressed to Obama that explicitly posits the need for a "viable Palestinian state."
It is expected that the overwhelming majority of the congressmen will sign it.
Netanyahu has been aware of the letter's content for some time, according to his senior adviser, Ron Dermer.
Dermer said that despite the letter's language, the important issue was that of underlying policy.
"On the substance, I don't think there's a difference in our position and the position of AIPAC," he said.
It is understood that the letter is being advanced despite its discrepancy with the prime minister's stated positions, because its content reflects both longstanding American policy and longstanding AIPAC positions.
The idea is that the letter would form a bridge between US and Israeli views on the diplomatic process at a time when neither country is looking to provoke arguments despite having different perspectives.
Furthermore, it is being noted here that Netanyahu has made plain that his government will honor previous agreements, which include the road map with its specific framework for a path to Palestinian statehood.
It is not known whether Netanyahu will publicly endorse a two-state solution when he meets here on May 18 with Obama, but it is widely assumed that, privately at least, he will make plain to Obama his government's commitment to previous accords.
Several versions of the letter are included in the kits being given out to participants in this week's AIPAC conference.
One version, bearing a "United States Senate" letterhead, addressed to Obama, and left open for signature, states: "We must also continue to insist on the absolute Palestinian commitment to ending terrorist violence and to building the institutions necessary for a viable Palestinian state living side-by-side, in peace with the Jewish state of Israel."
This version also gives explicit support for programs such as the US-supervised training of Palestinian Authority security forces.
"The more capable and responsible Palestinian forces become, the more they demonstrate the ability to govern and to maintain security, the easier it will be for [the Palestinians] to reach an accord with Israel," it states.
"We encourage you to continue programs similar to the promising security assistance and training programs led by Lieutenant-General Keith Dayton, and hope that you will look for other ways to improve Palestinian security and civilian infrastructure."
A second, similar version, also addressed to Obama and signed by staunchly pro-Israel Majority Leader Stony Hoyer and Republican Whip Eric Cantor, sets out a series of "basic principles" that, if adhered to, offer "the best way to achieve future success between Israelis and Palestinians."
Among the principles cited is the requirement for the two parties to directly negotiate the details of any agreement, the imperative for the US government to serve as "both a trusted mediator and a devoted friend to Israel," and the need for Arab states to move toward normal ties with Israel and to support "moderate Palestinians."
The clause that discusses statehood demands "an absolute Palestinian commitment to end violence, terror, and incitement and to build the institutions necessary for a viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace with the Jewish state of Israel inside secure borders."
It continues: "Once terrorists are no longer in control of Gaza and as responsible Palestinian forces become more capable of demonstrating the ability to govern and to maintain security, an accord with Israel will be easier to attain."
A third version of the letter, addressed to their colleagues, is signed by Senators Christopher Dodd, Arlen Specter, Johnny Isakson and John Thune.
It states that "we must redouble our efforts to eliminate support for terrorist violence and strengthen the Palestinian institutions necessary for the creation of a viable Palestinian state living side-by-side, in peace with Israel."
Netanyahu chose not to attend this week's AIPAC conference in part because a Washington visit now would have included, as its central element, talks at the White House with Obama, and Netanyahu preferred to defer that meeting by another two weeks in order to complete his ongoing foreign policy review.
Instead, the prime minister will address the AIPAC delegates by satellite on Monday. Hoyer and Cantor are set to address the same session.
President Shimon Peres is attending the Washington conference in Netanyahu's stead, and will speak on Monday along with Vice President Joseph Biden. Peres will meet with Obama at the White House on Tuesday.
Netanyahu has long indicated that his concerns about Palestinian statehood are practical, rather than ideological - arising from the fear that a fully sovereign Palestinian state might abuse its sovereignty to forge alliances, import arms and build an offensive military capability to threaten Israel.
Aides to the prime minister have also argued in recent days that it is unreasonable to demand that Israel formally endorse statehood for the Palestinian people when the Palestinian leadership is emphatically opposed to recognizing Israel as the state of the Jewish people.
The Hoyer-Cantor letter opens by acknowledging the "formidable" obstacles to peace, but endorses Obama's position "that every effort should be made to try to realize that peace at the soonest possible time."
///
Obama Gives Unsettling Tough Love to Israel
Celestine Bohlen
Bloomberg (Opinion)
July 28, 2009 - 12:00am
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=amJSnyGS15AM
President Barack Obama, who vowed to revive the Arab-Israeli peace process at the start of his term, has begun with a direct and public challenge to Israel’s latest plan to build new settlements in East Jerusalem.
It’s a risky move, which has already provoked a sharp rebuke from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. But it is crucial, and had to be done.
Obama picked a small but symbolic issue: a 20-unit housing project on the site of the former Shepherd Hotel, sparking a full-blown diplomatic standoff. Just days after the U.S. objected to the project, the European Union, Russia and France did the same.
This gambit puts the settlements issue at the center of the table, even before the next round of Arab-Israeli negotiations start -- if they ever do. The downside is that it might only serve to harden Israel’s stance, without softening Arab positions.
The stalemate in the Middle East needs a new approach, and Obama is right to give it a try. By opening the most sensitive dossier first, he has delivered to Israel its first dose of tough love since the administration of President George H.W. Bush.
Provocative Timing
There can be no so-called two-state solution that doesn’t take into account the famous “facts on the grounds,” created by Israel over international objections. At issue are the fate of some 300,000 Israeli settlers now living in the West Bank, and another 190,000 in East Jerusalem.
Neither the U.S. nor the rest of the world has ever recognized Israel’s claim to the territories -- including mostly Arab East Jerusalem -- it captured after its victory in the 1967 Middle East war. By international standards, that makes housing projects for Jewish residents in those areas “settlements.”
The Shepherd Hotel site is a case in point. The most important fact about this particular project is that the building permit was granted on July 2, just weeks after the Obama administration first signaled its zero-tolerance for new building in the captured territories.
Israel’s timing couldn’t be more provocative. Giving the green light to the project now, after years of delays, may be part of a larger plan to “Balkanize” East Jerusalem, splitting neighborhoods in such a way that a future political solution for the city becomes impossible.
Or it may have been intended as a signal that Israel will continue to build as Israel sees fit, no matter what Washington says.
No ‘Natural Growth’
Either way, it is “unhelpful” as Condoleezza Rice, the former secretary of State, said in 2005 about other unilateral steps taken by Israel in East Jerusalem. That was her polite, and not very effective, way of telling Israel to hold off.
The Obama administration’s call for a freeze on new settlement construction has been unambiguous. The U.S. “wants to see a stop to settlements -- not some settlements, not outposts, not ‘natural growth’ exceptions,” said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on May 27. She could have added “not in East Jerusalem,” which was the point of a message about the Shepherd Hotel project delivered this month to the new Israeli ambassador to the U.S.
Israel’s reaction was just as clear: an undivided Jerusalem is and will always be the capital of Israel. “Our sovereignty over it cannot be challenged,” said Netanyahu at a July 19 cabinet meeting. No one, he added, has the right to tell Jews where they can live in their own capital city.
Changing the Subject
Obama, as a candidate, promised to support Jerusalem’s status as the undivided capital of Israel. What the boundaries of the city will end up being depends on negotiations.
The Israeli government has tried to change the issue: Dan Meridor, an Israeli government minister, accused the Obama administration of breaking with an agreement made in 2004 with President George W. Bush.
His protest is disingenuous. The Israelis themselves have “not fully” lived up to that agreement, in the words of Elliot Abrams, a National Security Council adviser in the second Bush administration. One of the four brokered points called for a halt to government subsidies for settlers. Those have in fact continued.
Challenging the Israelis is a requirement for any U.S. administration interested in serious peace-making in the Middle East, said Aaron David Miller, a scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, who was an adviser on the region to several U.S. secretaries of State.
This time, both Netanyahu and Obama have “climbed up a very big tree,” Miller said. “They can stay there and scream, they can climb down, or they can make a deal.”
Obama is right to signal that there can be no deal as long as Israel tries to get away with creating more facts on the ground. Breaking the stalemate requires inflicting some pain, even if it’s on the U.S.’s best ally in the Middle East.
///
he Reason They Won't Help Abu-Mazen
Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed
Asharq Alawsat
July 27, 2009 - 12:00am
http://www.aawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=2&id=17573
In the Arab world, you must be annoying or a source of troubles to get care and attention. But if you respected the rules, did not cause clamor, or caused deaths and explosions, then no one would care about you. Therefore it is not surprising when the Somalis seek to host Al-Qaeda organization and hijack ships in their search for attention and support.
The Palestinian Authority's [PA] government has been there for more than three years. It is a respected institution which is implementing everything asked of it by building the government's establishments and complying with its municipal, services, and financial obligations towards its citizens. It succeeded in eliminating the widespread corruption, reduced cronyism, balanced its small budget, did not issue a statement crying over its bad financial situation, and waited at the door hoping that the donors would fulfill their financial promises. But the majority let it down. The reason is that the PA today is not like the old one. Now, it does not curse the others, does not send terrorists, does not annoy the Arab governments, and does not turn a blind eye to the extremists carrying out their operations in the region. The result is that no one is helping Abu-Mazin's Government because they do not fear him or wish him well too.
The image becomes clearer when we see the billions of dollars being showered on Lebanon because of the Fatah al-Islam's crimes, Hezbollah's adventures, and the verbal clashes between the communities' leaders while the fate of the West Bank, which has been suffering for years, does not have its own revenues, and is sitting waiting for peace or a return to war, is one of neglect. Had the PA opened its mouth, shouted and cursed, or had unleashed its security organs in battles with its adversaries and the blood run in Ramallah, then we would have seen the Arab delegations flock to Cairo for urgent meetings and exceptional generosity calling for calm and promising to pay the costs of the destruction and support the budget, as they did with Gaza.
It is disgraceful when the Arabs talk with false anguish about Palestine, shed crocodile over the Palestinians' tragedy, and denounce Israel day and night while the almost only parties that are paying the price of the bread and quilt for the West Bank people today are the Americans and Europeans. The PA is required to manage the affairs of more than 4 million Palestinians every day, including those living in Gaza. It is required to maintain peace inside its territories, persuade its citizens to wait for a happy ending, and forget bad examples like Abu-Nidal. It is required to comply with its stands and statements but no one among the Arabs is sharing with it the responsibility. Washington paid this week $200 million while nothing was paid by the Arab governments despite the many conferences and promises.
I am not a supporter of assisting but the PA's situation today is exceptional. It is in the stage of establishing a civilian state that paves the way for an independent one which stands on its feet economically and not just politically. It is required not to make a mistake and fabricate battles and not allow the factions to fight.
Be confident that the Palestinian state is not anymore a false mirage but within reach despite the Israeli forces that are trying to disrupt it. It therefore needs full support so that it can stand fast until it crosses the decisive few coming days. If we cannot blame the Israelis for their constant efforts to sabotage the new state before it is born by closing the road, extending the wall, expelling the villagers from their villages, depriving the farmers of their farms, and placing obstacles in the way of imports and trade, it is our duty to blame the Arab side that acts only when it sees the fires or blood or is embarrassed before public opinion.
///
The “Usefulness” of the Palestinian Cause
Husam Itani
Dar Al-Hayat (Opinion)
July 27, 2009 - 12:00am
http://www.daralhayat.com/portalarticlendah/42021
If one were to place side by side Israel’s decisions and stances regarding the conflict with the Palestinians since Benjamin Netanyahu was elected Prime Minister six months ago, the features of an unmistakably organized campaign to do away with what remains of the rights of Palestinians would plainly appear.
From refraining from taking any practical measures to dismantle “illegal settlements” or “hilltop outposts” in the West Bank to the decision of Israel’s Education Minister to remove references to the 1948 “nakba” (catastrophe) from the school curriculums of Arab students in Israel, going through changing the names of Arab sites and intensifying construction in East Jerusalem in an unprecedented fashion. As for the latest innovation produced by the expansionist mind, it is a plan to build thousands of residential units between Jerusalem and the massive Maaleh Adumim settlement bloc in the West Bank.
No fool would accept the nonsense repeated by Netanyahu and his cabinet members, that the necessities of natural growth are what has dictated this new campaign of settlement and Judaization, and no reasonable person could accept Israel’s vision of unbridled building rights on the occupied lands of others, about which innumerable decisions have been issued by every international institution, from the Security Council to the International Court of Justice (decision over the illegality of the separation wall), the UNESCO and others, stating that such rights belong to a state’s exercise of its sovereignty on its own soil.
Thus, there is no need for this wave of settlement other that the needs of the Israeli government and the right-wing parties that control it. One might believe that the decisions which are being successively issued at a fast pace in the past weeks represent the implementation of Netanyahu’s speech at Bar-Ilan University last June. Indeed, removing Palestinian-Arab identity from places and from memory goes hand in hand with preventing the establishment of a viable Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
This does not fall outside the scope of the obvious unless compared with the inefficiency of Arab responses. Moreover, the problem does not reside in what the Israelis do nor do not on lands they have seized by force and weapons, but rather in the situation of those who demand the restitution of the land, as they are with every attempt confronted to the facts of their fragmented political reality, which embraces all kinds of conflicts.
Comparing Israel’s current impetus with the paucity of Arab reactions (from both the camps of defiance and moderation as well as Palestinian forces themselves, without distinction or bias), one can conclude that the issue of Jerusalem and the occupied territories, and the Palestinian cause as a whole, does not represent a true concern outside of the framework of short-term and direct political exploitation. In fact, it is no exaggeration to say that the silence prevalent in official Arab headquarters and in resistance movements of various colors plainly states that what the Palestinian cause entails in the present phase surpasses the abilities of Arabs not just to take action (as that was surpassed a long time ago), but even to comprehend and contain it rationally and politically. Such a cause is no longer useful even in the fields of verbal mobilization and exchanged media campaigns, which represented a firmly established phenomenon in Arab policies over decades.
The Palestinian cause is no longer useful, from the traditional Arab point of view which resides between the limits of outbidding and drivel and the vain pursuit of Israeli concessions that will never come. Hence it is no wonder that Netanyahu feels that his hands are free to do whatever he wants without concerning himself with US warnings and objections, whose proponents declare that they will not turn them into sanctions
///
'Obama is a racist,' settler rabbi tells protestors in Jerusalem
Chaim Levinson
Haaretz
July 28, 2009 - 12:00am
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1103224.html
The Yesha Council of settlements organized a demonstration in which some 1,500 rightists gathered near the home of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem on Monday to protest the Obama administration's demand for a total freeze on Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank.
Among the speakers at the demonstration was Rabbi Eliezer Waldman, the head of the Nir yeshiva in the settlement of Kiryat Arba. "Obama is a racist," Waldman told the assembled crowd. "If he continues with his actions, he will bring about the disintegration of the American superpower."
The speeches were accompanied by jeers from the protesters at every mention of U.S. special envoy George Mitchell, who is currently in the region in a bid to reach a deal on settlement construction.
Advertisement
Right-wing demonstrators are planning a large-scale settlement operation next week - hundreds of youngsters will set up 11 new West Bank outposts, to commemorate the 1946 operation when 11 new settlements were set up overnight in the northern Negev, during the British Mandate.
The move coincides with the arrival of U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who is expected to discuss the evacuation of illegal outposts in the West Bank.
The groups organizing the move include Youth for the Land of Israel and the Land of Israel Faithful, and are associated with settler leaders Rabbi Moshe Levinger, Rabbi Uzi Sharbaf of Hebron, and Daniela Weiss.
They are planning to erect outposts called Havat Haro'im in the southern Hebron hills; Maalot Hebron, between Kiryat Arba and Hebron; Gat Yosef, near Nablus; Mitzpeh Avihai; Sela; Oz Yehonatan; Givat Egoz; Inbalim, next to Michmesh; Tsur-Ya, next to Avnei Hefetz; and Netzer, near Efrat, which was evacuated several times over the past few years.
In addition, a large group is planning to rebuild the Nofei Yarden outpost, which was cleared out last week.
The activists have been planning the operation for three months, and expect hundreds of youngsters help settle the land and thousands of others to show support. Over the weekend, 20,000 pamphlets describing the operation and its ideology were distributed in synagogues.
///
APN urges Senate to not sign AIPAC-backed letter (CORRECTED)
By Eric Fingerhut · July 27, 2009
Americans for Peace Now is urging U.S. senators to not sign a letter to the president backing his efforts to encourage Arab states to normalize relations with Israel, because the letter doesn't mention the administration's efforts to halt Israeli settlements.
APN says the bipartisan letter, circulated by Sens. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.) and James Risch (R-Idaho) and backed by AIPAC, is "unhelpful" because it "seems to make a straightforward and reasonable demand for the Arab world to normalize relations with Israel," but "the subtext of the letter directly contradicts and undermines the efforts" of the Obama administration "to promote Middle East peace."
"The Bayh/Risch letter conspicuously ignores Israel's continued refusal to stop settlement activity" and "never even once mentions the word 'settlements,'" states the APN letter. "It sends a message that signers consider settlements more important that peace."
The Bayh-Risch letter notes that "over the past few months Israel has taken concrete measures to reaffirm its commitment to advancing the peace process," such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu backing a two-state solution and the removal of roadblocks and other measures to "improve the daily lives of Palestinians."
"We encourage Arab leaders to take similar tangible steps to demonstrate their commitment to the peace process," write the senators. "Such steps could include ending the Arab League boycott of Israel, meeting openly with Israeli officials, establishing open trade relations with Israel, issuing visas to Israeli citizens, and inviting Israelis to participate in academic and professional conferences and sporting events. We also believe that Arab states must immediately and permanently end official propaganda campaigns which demonize Israel and Jews."
The letter then asks Obama "what steps you are urging Arab states to take and what your expectations are from Arab states in the coming weeks and months."
(AIPAC is also backing a House letter in the same vein, but to Saudi King Abdullah. Circulated by Reps. Howard Berman and Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) and Ed Royce (D-Calif.), it asks the king to take a "strong leadership role" and make a "dramatic gesture toward Israel.")
Both the APN letter and the Bayh-Risch letter are after the jump:
First, the Bayh-Risch letter:
Dear Mr. President:
We write in support of your efforts to encourage Arab states to normalize relations with the State of Israel. In your June 4th address to the Muslim world, you highlighted the key role that Arab states can play in furthering the peace process and called on them to openly recognize Israel’s legitimacy. Secretary Clinton underscored these remarks when she stated that Arab countries “have a responsibility to support the Palestinian Authority with words and deeds, to take steps to improve relations with Israel and to prepare their publics to embrace peace and accept Israel’s place in the region.” We applaud these comments and agree with you and Secretary Clinton that Arab states must do more to end their isolation of Israel.
Over the past few months Israel has taken concrete measures to reaffirm its commitment to advancing the peace process. Notably, Prime Minister Netanyahu has publically expressed support for the two-state solution and called for the immediate resumption of peace negotiations. We have also been encouraged by Israeli efforts to improve the daily lives of Palestinians, through measures such as removing roadblocks, assisting with economic development in the West Bank, and supporting the training of professional Palestinian Authority security personnel. These actions have demonstrated that Israel is willing to back up its words with concrete actions, even in the face of continuing threats to its security.
We encourage Arab leaders to take similar tangible steps to demonstrate their commitment to the peace process. Such steps could include ending the Arab League boycott of Israel, meeting openly with Israeli officials, establishing open trade relations with Israel, issuing visas to Israeli citizens, and inviting Israelis to participate in academic and professional conferences and sporting events. We also believe that Arab states must immediately and permanently end official propaganda campaigns which demonize Israel and Jews.
Given these facts, we would like to understand what steps you are urging Arab states to take and what your expectations are from Arab states in the coming weeks and months. We also hope that you will continue to press Arab leaders to consider dramatic gestures toward Israel similar to those taken previously by brave leaders like King Hussein of Jordan and Anwar El-Sadat of Egypt. Such gestures would send a powerful signal that Arab nations are committed to the peace process and could help usher in a new era of peace and security in the Middle East.
And the APN missive:
Dear XXXX ,
Late last week a Dear Colleague from Senators Evan Bayh (D-IN) and James Risch (R-ID) began circulating in the Senate, related to the Obama Administration’s efforts to promote Middle East peace. APN urges members of the Senate to refrain from signing this letter unless/until it is amended to reflect the real steps needed to achieve peace that President Obama has asked Israel to take.
On its face, the letter seems to make a straightforward and reasonable demand for the Arab world to normalize relations with Israel. As strong supporters of Israel who believe that Israeli-Palestinian and Israeli-Arab peace are critical to the viability and prosperity of the state of Israel, we would like to see this happen, and see a day when Israelis and Arabs can travel freely throughout the region and enjoy normal, good relations.
The subtext of the letter, however, directly contradicts and undermines the efforts of President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Special Middle East Envoy George Mitchell to promote Middle East peace.
President Obama, Secretary Clinton, and Special Envoy Mitchell are investing a huge amount of energy and political capital in trying to create a dynamic with Israel, the Palestinians and the Arab states, asking all to take tangible steps that can create confidence in the peace process and help build momentum toward Middle East peace. This is a promising effort -- one that holds out real hope for achieving Israeli-Palestinian and Israeli-Arab peace and, along with it, real normalization of Arab-Israeli relations.
They are pressing Arab states to demonstrate good faith by taking a range of steps toward normalization of relations with Israel, in the context of meaningful steps taken by Israel toward peace. This is an effort that Congress should support.
They are pressing the Palestinians to improve and expand on the positive actions already taken on security, to act forcefully against incitement, and to refrain from any action that would make meaningful negotiations less likely. This is an effort that Congress should support.
With respect to Israel, as everyone knows, they are pressing on one main issue: for Israel to stop settlement activity. This position is consistent with longstanding US policy and with promises Israel has made, repeatedly, to past US administrations. It is also consistent with Israel’s own best interests: settlements represent an economic, political and security liability for Israel. Settlements also erode the confidence, even among Israel’s friends and supporters, that Israel is truly interested in peace, and make the eventual resolution of the conflict more difficult and more costly for Israel to carry out. This effort to get Israel to stop settlement activity is something Congress should also support.
The Bayh/Risch letter conspicuously ignores Israel’s continued refusal to stop settlement activity and its recent decision to “up the ante” by approving a highly controversial settlement project in the heart of a Palestinian neighborhood of East Jerusalem - a project that has been on hold for more than 20 years.
Indeed, the Bayh/Risch letter never once even mentions the word “settlements.”
President Obama, Secretary Clinton, and Special Envoy Mitchell are right to be pressing Arab states to match positive Israeli steps with positive steps of their own, and it is right for Congress to echo this message. But this letter sends a different message altogether: that signers of the letter do not support President Obama in his efforts to achieve peace for Israel and bring security, stability, and normalcy to the region. It sends a message that signers consider settlements more important than peace.
We look forward with longing to the day when there is real peace and full normalization of relations between Israel and the entire Arab world. We strongly believe that the Obama Administration’s approach offers the best opportunity to achieve this goal.
We urge all Senators to support President Obama in his efforts, and to refrain from signing this unhelpful letter, unless and until it is amended to also reflect the real steps needed to achieve peace that President Obama has asked Israel to take.
Sincerely,
Lara Friedman
Director of Policy and Government Relations