5 july 2013
Israel has sent an official envoy to Cairo on Thursday to conduct several meetings for security cooperation in light of the Egyptian recent developments, Yediot Ahronot Hebrew newspaper revealed on Friday. The paper wrote that few hours after the military coup in Egypt, Israel sent an envoy to Egypt to meet with senior officials in the Egyptian security and intelligence services.
Israel has kept from commenting publicly on its neighbor’s turmoil, but early Thursday dispatched an unnamed official to Cairo to make contact with senior intelligence officials, Yedioth Ahronot reported Friday.
While relations with Egypt were officially icy while Morsi was in power, behind the scenes, officials say security coordination between the countries was good, the paper added
"Israel is reportedly coordinating an Egyptian security buildup in the Sinai, designed to keep Gazan and Bedouin militants from exploiting the chaos of the political transition to smuggle arms into Gaza or carry out attacks against Israeli or Egyptian targets."
The paper quoted an Egyptian senior security official as saying that Cairo and Tel Aviv are preparing to thwart any possible response from the" Muslim Brotherhood" and Hamas military wing following the isolation of Morsi.
Israeli and Egyptian senior security officials have also warned against any possible Iranian response in Sinai in order to create a new Islamic reality in the region.
Israel has kept from commenting publicly on its neighbor’s turmoil, but early Thursday dispatched an unnamed official to Cairo to make contact with senior intelligence officials, Yedioth Ahronot reported Friday.
While relations with Egypt were officially icy while Morsi was in power, behind the scenes, officials say security coordination between the countries was good, the paper added
"Israel is reportedly coordinating an Egyptian security buildup in the Sinai, designed to keep Gazan and Bedouin militants from exploiting the chaos of the political transition to smuggle arms into Gaza or carry out attacks against Israeli or Egyptian targets."
The paper quoted an Egyptian senior security official as saying that Cairo and Tel Aviv are preparing to thwart any possible response from the" Muslim Brotherhood" and Hamas military wing following the isolation of Morsi.
Israeli and Egyptian senior security officials have also warned against any possible Iranian response in Sinai in order to create a new Islamic reality in the region.
Israel's President Shimon Peres (L) talks during a joint news conference with European Council President Herman van Rompuy, after a meeting at the EU Council in Brussels, March 6, 2013
Several days before US Secretary of State John Kerry started his fifth round of shuttle diplomacy in the region, Baroness Catherine Ashton, the European Union’s high representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, wound up a working visit to Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Israel and the West Bank. In Jerusalem, Ashton met a confused and even frightened Israeli prime minister. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s fear of the shock waves going through Egypt and Syria and the instability in Jordan are competing with his anxiety over Iran’s nuclear program, and recently also with concern about Israel becoming a binational state. On the face of it, Netanyahu understands that freezing the diplomatic process will perpetuate the binational reality that already exists between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River. Actually, he refuses to pay the list price for changing this reality, especially given the regional turbulence.
Ashton, like other important European diplomats, believes that the volatile situation in Israel’s immediate surroundings actually makes the need to prevent an additional upheaval in the region especially urgent. They question the assumption — which appears in Shlomi Eldar’s article, too — that the continued stalemate in negotiations will not affect the situation in the occupied territories. In Brussels, the prevailing assumption is that the repercussions of the failed diplomacy for the status of the Palestinian Authority (PA) should be taken into account in the coming months. They warn that the cumulative rage against the occupation and the settlements, the lack of hope for a diplomatic arrangement and the fear of an economic collapse will bring the Arab Spring to the Palestinian arena and result in the toppling of the PA and cause governmental and security chaos.
This fear explains the growing desire on the part of central EU states, led by Britain and France, to increase pressure on Israel to move toward an arrangement with the PA. At the end of an EU foreign ministers’ meeting on June 24, both countries wanted to issue a tough statement condemning construction in the settlements and place the blame on Israel for torpedoing diplomatic negotiations.
Netanyahu told Ashton that such an announcement on the eve of Kerry’s visit to the region would undermine his efforts to breathe life into the diplomatic process. Ashton acceded to his request, thereby adopting the approach of her predecessor, former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Javier Solana, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, according to which the United States conducts the Middle East orchestra and Europe plays second fiddle. Even when the United States loses the diplomatic battle, Europe lets it conduct the unfinished Israeli-Palestinian symphony. The meeting of the EU foreign ministers ended, thus, in a whimper, with another anemic statement. Once again, the European politicians did not stand in the way of the United States as it trod in place.
Barely three days went by and Israel paid back Ashton and Merkel by issuing 40 injunctions to stop work on the erection of tents, hothouses and a water hole for residents of the Palestinian village of Susya in the south Hebron mountain (Area C). Several of those tents were erected with EU funding to provide basic humanitarian services like a clinic, a kindergarten and a makeshift school. Inspectors of Israel’s civil administration in the West Bank accorded similar treatment to a solar energy facility, paid for by German taxpayers. A committee of the civil administration is to decide in the coming days whether to upgrade the work stoppage injunctions and turn them into dismantlement orders. A committee decision to go ahead with destruction of the project would be a slap in the face for Ashton, who announced that she had already called on Israel a year ago to comply with its commitments to stop forced relocations of Palestinians living in Area C as well as the destruction of homes there, to simplify the planning process and ensure access to water and humanitarian needs.
As reflected in remarks made this week by Justice Minister Tzipi Livni on July 1 at the annual conference of accountants in Eilat, the European public is losing patience with Israel. The former foreign minister, who meets often with European politicians and diplomats, warned that the boycott imposed by Europeans against products made in the settlements will be followed by a boycott on all Israeli products. “Their problem is with Israel, which is perceived as a colonialist state,” explained the minister in charge of negotiations with the Palestinians.
In a memorandum published at the end of June by the Institute of National Security Studies (INSS), Shimon Stein, Israel’s former ambassador to Germany, wrote things that a minister in Netanyahu’s government cannot say. According to Stein, his talks with European officials reveal striking mistrust and skepticism of Netanyahu’s willingness to advance the two-state solution. The retired senior diplomat warns that a freeze in talks will encourage countries like France, Britain and others to once again express their views openly on various central issues on the agenda. “There are voices calling on the Union — in the event that talks do not result in progress after a time — to toughen its stance toward Israel to the extent of recognizing the Palestinian state.” Stein got the impression that Europe expects real progress in negotiations and will not be satisfied just with a renewal of negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
As long as Kerry announces that there’s progress in his talks and promises to return to the region soon, Israel is protected against such European moves. As long as the US wheels keep spinning — even if the motor is idling — Europe will be careful not to be portrayed as a spoke in those wheels. Netanyahu should hope that Kerry keeps running from Jerusalem to Ramallah, enabling the prime minister to float “tents” in the air. On the day US President Barack Obama decides to stop wasting fuel on a “peace process” leading nowhere, the EU will have to decide whether to take the wheel or stay behind all the way as we journey toward an abyss.
Akiva Eldar is a contributing writer for Al-Monitor’s Israel Pulse. He was formerly a senior columnist and editorial writer for Haaretz and also served as the Hebrew daily’s US bureau chief and diplomatic correspondent. His most recent book (with Idith Zertal), Lords of the Land, on the Jewish settlements, was on the best-seller list in Israel and has been translated into English, German and Arabic.
Several days before US Secretary of State John Kerry started his fifth round of shuttle diplomacy in the region, Baroness Catherine Ashton, the European Union’s high representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, wound up a working visit to Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Israel and the West Bank. In Jerusalem, Ashton met a confused and even frightened Israeli prime minister. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s fear of the shock waves going through Egypt and Syria and the instability in Jordan are competing with his anxiety over Iran’s nuclear program, and recently also with concern about Israel becoming a binational state. On the face of it, Netanyahu understands that freezing the diplomatic process will perpetuate the binational reality that already exists between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River. Actually, he refuses to pay the list price for changing this reality, especially given the regional turbulence.
Ashton, like other important European diplomats, believes that the volatile situation in Israel’s immediate surroundings actually makes the need to prevent an additional upheaval in the region especially urgent. They question the assumption — which appears in Shlomi Eldar’s article, too — that the continued stalemate in negotiations will not affect the situation in the occupied territories. In Brussels, the prevailing assumption is that the repercussions of the failed diplomacy for the status of the Palestinian Authority (PA) should be taken into account in the coming months. They warn that the cumulative rage against the occupation and the settlements, the lack of hope for a diplomatic arrangement and the fear of an economic collapse will bring the Arab Spring to the Palestinian arena and result in the toppling of the PA and cause governmental and security chaos.
This fear explains the growing desire on the part of central EU states, led by Britain and France, to increase pressure on Israel to move toward an arrangement with the PA. At the end of an EU foreign ministers’ meeting on June 24, both countries wanted to issue a tough statement condemning construction in the settlements and place the blame on Israel for torpedoing diplomatic negotiations.
Netanyahu told Ashton that such an announcement on the eve of Kerry’s visit to the region would undermine his efforts to breathe life into the diplomatic process. Ashton acceded to his request, thereby adopting the approach of her predecessor, former EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Javier Solana, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, according to which the United States conducts the Middle East orchestra and Europe plays second fiddle. Even when the United States loses the diplomatic battle, Europe lets it conduct the unfinished Israeli-Palestinian symphony. The meeting of the EU foreign ministers ended, thus, in a whimper, with another anemic statement. Once again, the European politicians did not stand in the way of the United States as it trod in place.
Barely three days went by and Israel paid back Ashton and Merkel by issuing 40 injunctions to stop work on the erection of tents, hothouses and a water hole for residents of the Palestinian village of Susya in the south Hebron mountain (Area C). Several of those tents were erected with EU funding to provide basic humanitarian services like a clinic, a kindergarten and a makeshift school. Inspectors of Israel’s civil administration in the West Bank accorded similar treatment to a solar energy facility, paid for by German taxpayers. A committee of the civil administration is to decide in the coming days whether to upgrade the work stoppage injunctions and turn them into dismantlement orders. A committee decision to go ahead with destruction of the project would be a slap in the face for Ashton, who announced that she had already called on Israel a year ago to comply with its commitments to stop forced relocations of Palestinians living in Area C as well as the destruction of homes there, to simplify the planning process and ensure access to water and humanitarian needs.
As reflected in remarks made this week by Justice Minister Tzipi Livni on July 1 at the annual conference of accountants in Eilat, the European public is losing patience with Israel. The former foreign minister, who meets often with European politicians and diplomats, warned that the boycott imposed by Europeans against products made in the settlements will be followed by a boycott on all Israeli products. “Their problem is with Israel, which is perceived as a colonialist state,” explained the minister in charge of negotiations with the Palestinians.
In a memorandum published at the end of June by the Institute of National Security Studies (INSS), Shimon Stein, Israel’s former ambassador to Germany, wrote things that a minister in Netanyahu’s government cannot say. According to Stein, his talks with European officials reveal striking mistrust and skepticism of Netanyahu’s willingness to advance the two-state solution. The retired senior diplomat warns that a freeze in talks will encourage countries like France, Britain and others to once again express their views openly on various central issues on the agenda. “There are voices calling on the Union — in the event that talks do not result in progress after a time — to toughen its stance toward Israel to the extent of recognizing the Palestinian state.” Stein got the impression that Europe expects real progress in negotiations and will not be satisfied just with a renewal of negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
As long as Kerry announces that there’s progress in his talks and promises to return to the region soon, Israel is protected against such European moves. As long as the US wheels keep spinning — even if the motor is idling — Europe will be careful not to be portrayed as a spoke in those wheels. Netanyahu should hope that Kerry keeps running from Jerusalem to Ramallah, enabling the prime minister to float “tents” in the air. On the day US President Barack Obama decides to stop wasting fuel on a “peace process” leading nowhere, the EU will have to decide whether to take the wheel or stay behind all the way as we journey toward an abyss.
Akiva Eldar is a contributing writer for Al-Monitor’s Israel Pulse. He was formerly a senior columnist and editorial writer for Haaretz and also served as the Hebrew daily’s US bureau chief and diplomatic correspondent. His most recent book (with Idith Zertal), Lords of the Land, on the Jewish settlements, was on the best-seller list in Israel and has been translated into English, German and Arabic.
by The Media Line
Becoming a citizen of a country ordinarily comes with a passport. Last year, the United Nations recognized "Palestine" as a non-member state, but many of its citizens say it doesn't make traveling easier.
The Palestinian passport, which was issued in 1995 and was based on the Oslo Accords reached between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Liberation Organization, is essentially a travel document and does not stipulate that its owner is a citizen of Palestine. The document's cover reads "the Palestinian Authority," not "Palestine." While Palestinians have changed the formal letterhead on many of their official documents from "the Palestinian Authority" to "Palestine," they continue to hold Palestinian Authority (PA) passports because Israel does not recognize the name Palestine.
The PA passport is available to any individual who can present a birth certificate showing he/she was born in Palestine; he/she must also hold a current Palestinian identity card.
All Palestinians residing in the areas under PA rule are entitled to a Palestinian Authority passport. However, those Palestinians living in east Jerusalem, which Israel annexed in 1967, can only hold a laissez-passer, the travel document issued to them by Israel. If they wish to travel to Arab countries that don't recognize Israel, they usually apply for a temporary Jordanian passport. Some Palestinians simply use a Jordanian passport for all of their travel.
Qasam Hamayel, a 25-year-old government employee with a Palestinian passport, tried to obtain a visa to go to Holland three years ago, but failed. He said he had all the documents that officials there requested.
"After I was invited by the Dutch government I was asked to present documents to prove that I was a student. I had a bank account, health insurance, and a return ticket but after a month they denied my application."
A letter justified the visa rejection on the basis that Hamayel didn't provide proof that he would return to the Palestinian territories. "They said that the Palestinians were recognized as an Authority, but not as a country so they couldn't deport me back if I stayed there illegally," he added.
Only two months ago, Hamayel's friend Ahmed Omar was also denied a visa to Holland, which means that the new Palestinian state status has so far not translated into fewer limitations on Palestinian movement.
Visas for Palestinians more expensive
In general, the UN recognition of Palestine as a non-member state last year has not led to great changes in the daily lives of Palestinians. Nevertheless, some countries have taken steps to acknowledge the new status by opening embassies – and other countries, such as Brazil, have even changed the name on their visa stamp from the "Palestinian Territories" to "Palestine." Kuwait has recently opened its first Palestinian embassy, and it allows Palestinians to enter Kuwait using their Palestinian passports.
For Fadi Abu Sa'da, a journalist, having an embassy doesn't have much meaning. "I was denied a visa to enter Kuwait three times," he said. Abu Sa'da had hoped to attend the Arab Media Forum, of which he is a board member, two years ago in Kuwait. He made efforts to apply via the forum itself, via a travel agency, and via Kuwaiti officials, all to no avail.
Palestinian-Kuwaiti relations have been strained ever since the First Gulf War, when deceased Palestinian President Yasser Arafat supported Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. "I wasn't given a justification or a clear answer, but I believe we are still being punished for Arafat's position", Abu Sa'da told The Media Line.
Palestinians who lived in Kuwait held Jordanian passports. After Israel captured the West Bank from Jordan in 1967, Palestinians living there continued to have the right to apply for Jordanian passports. Palestinian refugees actually living in Jordan were also considered full Jordanian citizens. But in July 1988, Jordan severed all legal and administrative ties with the West Bank. Palestinians who were living in Jordan at the time remained Jordanian citizens, but West Bank residents lost that status.
A source at the Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs told The Media Line that some countries fear that anyone visiting from a third-world country, including Palestinians, will want to stay.
However, some states, particularly the Gulf States may not want a large influx of Palestinians for "security" reasons.
Palestinian Deputy Minister of the Interior Hassan Alawi, denies that Palestinians are singled out for discrimination.
The Foreign Ministry source said that there is slow but steady progress being made on the passport issue. Governmental officials in Palestine say as more countries begin to work with them on an official basis, the process will improve. "As we don't have control of our borders, we can't sign mutual agreements with other countries. We can't tell Lebanese officials that we will let their citizens in our areas if they do the same for us," Alawi told The Media Line.
Obtaining a visa for other countries is also complicated for Palestinians. There are no specific explanations or guidelines as to which countries deny or allow Palestinians visas but many Palestinians express frustration when it comes to gaining access to them.
Shaker Garabedian of George Garabedian Tourist and Travel Bureau told The Media Line that Jordan is the only country that allows Palestinians to enter its territory without a visa. He also said that Palestinians stopped applying for visas to the Gulf States because they know they won't get them. "Also, visas for Palestinians are more expensive. A Jordanian pays $130 to go to Dubai, while a Palestinian pays $250, if the visa is granted", Garabedian said.
All other countries require visa applications months in advance, and without any guarantee of success. An individual needs to start the process a minimum of 20 days before his/her departure date.
Documents verifying health, employment, and even purchased round-trip tickets are mandatory in order to apply for visas to travel to other countries.
While complications continue to exist, even with the presence of the Palestinian passport, some existing loopholes have facilitated the granting of visa applications. For example, Palestinians are not technically eligible for an official US visa, as the PLO is still listed as a terrorist organization in the United States. Nevertheless, a waiver often enables them to receive visas. Such waivers have helped ease restrictions on Palestinians wishing to visit the United States, and there is hope that other countries will begin to make it easier for Palestinians to travel.
Becoming a citizen of a country ordinarily comes with a passport. Last year, the United Nations recognized "Palestine" as a non-member state, but many of its citizens say it doesn't make traveling easier.
The Palestinian passport, which was issued in 1995 and was based on the Oslo Accords reached between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Liberation Organization, is essentially a travel document and does not stipulate that its owner is a citizen of Palestine. The document's cover reads "the Palestinian Authority," not "Palestine." While Palestinians have changed the formal letterhead on many of their official documents from "the Palestinian Authority" to "Palestine," they continue to hold Palestinian Authority (PA) passports because Israel does not recognize the name Palestine.
The PA passport is available to any individual who can present a birth certificate showing he/she was born in Palestine; he/she must also hold a current Palestinian identity card.
All Palestinians residing in the areas under PA rule are entitled to a Palestinian Authority passport. However, those Palestinians living in east Jerusalem, which Israel annexed in 1967, can only hold a laissez-passer, the travel document issued to them by Israel. If they wish to travel to Arab countries that don't recognize Israel, they usually apply for a temporary Jordanian passport. Some Palestinians simply use a Jordanian passport for all of their travel.
Qasam Hamayel, a 25-year-old government employee with a Palestinian passport, tried to obtain a visa to go to Holland three years ago, but failed. He said he had all the documents that officials there requested.
"After I was invited by the Dutch government I was asked to present documents to prove that I was a student. I had a bank account, health insurance, and a return ticket but after a month they denied my application."
A letter justified the visa rejection on the basis that Hamayel didn't provide proof that he would return to the Palestinian territories. "They said that the Palestinians were recognized as an Authority, but not as a country so they couldn't deport me back if I stayed there illegally," he added.
Only two months ago, Hamayel's friend Ahmed Omar was also denied a visa to Holland, which means that the new Palestinian state status has so far not translated into fewer limitations on Palestinian movement.
Visas for Palestinians more expensive
In general, the UN recognition of Palestine as a non-member state last year has not led to great changes in the daily lives of Palestinians. Nevertheless, some countries have taken steps to acknowledge the new status by opening embassies – and other countries, such as Brazil, have even changed the name on their visa stamp from the "Palestinian Territories" to "Palestine." Kuwait has recently opened its first Palestinian embassy, and it allows Palestinians to enter Kuwait using their Palestinian passports.
For Fadi Abu Sa'da, a journalist, having an embassy doesn't have much meaning. "I was denied a visa to enter Kuwait three times," he said. Abu Sa'da had hoped to attend the Arab Media Forum, of which he is a board member, two years ago in Kuwait. He made efforts to apply via the forum itself, via a travel agency, and via Kuwaiti officials, all to no avail.
Palestinian-Kuwaiti relations have been strained ever since the First Gulf War, when deceased Palestinian President Yasser Arafat supported Iraq's invasion of Kuwait. "I wasn't given a justification or a clear answer, but I believe we are still being punished for Arafat's position", Abu Sa'da told The Media Line.
Palestinians who lived in Kuwait held Jordanian passports. After Israel captured the West Bank from Jordan in 1967, Palestinians living there continued to have the right to apply for Jordanian passports. Palestinian refugees actually living in Jordan were also considered full Jordanian citizens. But in July 1988, Jordan severed all legal and administrative ties with the West Bank. Palestinians who were living in Jordan at the time remained Jordanian citizens, but West Bank residents lost that status.
A source at the Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs told The Media Line that some countries fear that anyone visiting from a third-world country, including Palestinians, will want to stay.
However, some states, particularly the Gulf States may not want a large influx of Palestinians for "security" reasons.
Palestinian Deputy Minister of the Interior Hassan Alawi, denies that Palestinians are singled out for discrimination.
The Foreign Ministry source said that there is slow but steady progress being made on the passport issue. Governmental officials in Palestine say as more countries begin to work with them on an official basis, the process will improve. "As we don't have control of our borders, we can't sign mutual agreements with other countries. We can't tell Lebanese officials that we will let their citizens in our areas if they do the same for us," Alawi told The Media Line.
Obtaining a visa for other countries is also complicated for Palestinians. There are no specific explanations or guidelines as to which countries deny or allow Palestinians visas but many Palestinians express frustration when it comes to gaining access to them.
Shaker Garabedian of George Garabedian Tourist and Travel Bureau told The Media Line that Jordan is the only country that allows Palestinians to enter its territory without a visa. He also said that Palestinians stopped applying for visas to the Gulf States because they know they won't get them. "Also, visas for Palestinians are more expensive. A Jordanian pays $130 to go to Dubai, while a Palestinian pays $250, if the visa is granted", Garabedian said.
All other countries require visa applications months in advance, and without any guarantee of success. An individual needs to start the process a minimum of 20 days before his/her departure date.
Documents verifying health, employment, and even purchased round-trip tickets are mandatory in order to apply for visas to travel to other countries.
While complications continue to exist, even with the presence of the Palestinian passport, some existing loopholes have facilitated the granting of visa applications. For example, Palestinians are not technically eligible for an official US visa, as the PLO is still listed as a terrorist organization in the United States. Nevertheless, a waiver often enables them to receive visas. Such waivers have helped ease restrictions on Palestinians wishing to visit the United States, and there is hope that other countries will begin to make it easier for Palestinians to travel.
4 july 2013
The 2nd leaders’ summit of the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF) has taken place in Moscow. Experts say there is a candidate to enter the elite club of 13 members once the rich East Mediterranean deposits start to be developed. The vast sea bottom natural gas fields were discovered a few years ago. Israel is the leader in the development; it starts its activities without waiting for neither ultimate resolution of legal issues, nor settling the emerging disputes with neighbors.
It has been exploring the shelf area for many years. In 2009-2010 US Noble Energy discovered substantial natural gas deposits. According to first estimations, the deposits found were to contain 950 billion cubic metres of natural gas, the potential cost exceeding $260 billion. The Tamar gas field (283 billion cubic meters) is located in Israel’s exclusive economic zone, roughly 80 kilometers (50 mi) west of Haifa in waters 1,700 metres (5,600 ft.) deep.
The Leviathan is located roughly 130 kilometers (81 mi) west of Haifa in waters 1,500 metres (4,900 ft.) deep in the Levantine basin, near the Lebanese shore, a rich hydrocarbon area in one of the world’s larger offshore gas finds of the past decade. The Tamar is developed by Noble Energy and Israeli Delek Group, which belongs to Israeli billionaire Yitzhak Tshuva, the controlling shareholder. Australian Woodside Petroleum has won the bidding to become the leading developer of the Leviathan. Many gas industry majors kept away from bidding because of regional instability and co-ownership disputes. To avoid the reaction of Arab states Royal Dutch Shell energy giant sold down its major stake in Woodside Petroleum when it joined the Israeli project. (1)
It has been exploring the shelf area for many years. In 2009-2010 US Noble Energy discovered substantial natural gas deposits. According to first estimations, the deposits found were to contain 950 billion cubic metres of natural gas, the potential cost exceeding $260 billion. The Tamar gas field (283 billion cubic meters) is located in Israel’s exclusive economic zone, roughly 80 kilometers (50 mi) west of Haifa in waters 1,700 metres (5,600 ft.) deep.
The Leviathan is located roughly 130 kilometers (81 mi) west of Haifa in waters 1,500 metres (4,900 ft.) deep in the Levantine basin, near the Lebanese shore, a rich hydrocarbon area in one of the world’s larger offshore gas finds of the past decade. The Tamar is developed by Noble Energy and Israeli Delek Group, which belongs to Israeli billionaire Yitzhak Tshuva, the controlling shareholder. Australian Woodside Petroleum has won the bidding to become the leading developer of the Leviathan. Many gas industry majors kept away from bidding because of regional instability and co-ownership disputes. To avoid the reaction of Arab states Royal Dutch Shell energy giant sold down its major stake in Woodside Petroleum when it joined the Israeli project. (1)
Natural gas from the offshore Tamar field was pumped to Israeli shores for the first time on March 30, the day of the Passover holiday, in the presence of Energy and Water Minister Silvan Shalom. The ceremony took place against the backdrop of Orthodox rabbis protests; they said it was out of time violating the sanctity of holiday. The fact goes to show how significant the event was for the country and its people. Minister Shalom said, «This is an ‘energy independence day’ for Israel». «This breakthrough is the harbinger of the foray of additional private companies» into the Israeli energy market», he added.
Yitzhak Tshuva said that one cannot overestimate the importance of the Tamar gas for Israel’s economy. According to him, almost every superlative is appropriate in this case. Thanks to this and other offshore gas reserves, Israel will achieve energy independence for the first time in its history and will no longer have to go begging from other countries. The country has entered a new phase of its history. According to Tshuva, Tamar is a national pride of Israel. (2) Indeed, the discovery of Tamar has turned the country into a potential energy exporter. There were hot debates, the developers wanted the maximum 55% export quota, but the Netanyahu government took a more balanced decision by the end of July raising the domestic consumption share from 450 billion cubic meters to 540.
Some 260 – 360 billion cubic meters are to be exported. It means only 40% of gas production will go abroad, while the remaining 60% will provide Israel with gas supplies during 25, or even 30 years to follow. «The decision balances between the need to ensure a cheap and available source of energy for Israelis and the need to export. This amount of gas will meet our energy needs for at least the next 25 years, « Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pointed out. «We are not interested in becoming one of those nations that procrastinated and ended up without gas. We want to harvest the gas and produce billions of dollars in state revenue in favor of the country’s budgetary needs. We have to drive growth forward and natural gas is a growth engine», he said, adding that Israel stands to receive $60 billion in taxes and royalties from the sale of gas over the next two decades. The production will save around $ 4 billion yearly, the sum spent on imports at present. (3)
Silvan Shalom noted the government planned to extend the period of energy independence from 25 to 30 years. Sarah and Myra gas exploratory licenses have failed to produce gas. It has made Israel increase the share destined for domestic consumption. (4)
Yitzhak Tshuva said that one cannot overestimate the importance of the Tamar gas for Israel’s economy. According to him, almost every superlative is appropriate in this case. Thanks to this and other offshore gas reserves, Israel will achieve energy independence for the first time in its history and will no longer have to go begging from other countries. The country has entered a new phase of its history. According to Tshuva, Tamar is a national pride of Israel. (2) Indeed, the discovery of Tamar has turned the country into a potential energy exporter. There were hot debates, the developers wanted the maximum 55% export quota, but the Netanyahu government took a more balanced decision by the end of July raising the domestic consumption share from 450 billion cubic meters to 540.
Some 260 – 360 billion cubic meters are to be exported. It means only 40% of gas production will go abroad, while the remaining 60% will provide Israel with gas supplies during 25, or even 30 years to follow. «The decision balances between the need to ensure a cheap and available source of energy for Israelis and the need to export. This amount of gas will meet our energy needs for at least the next 25 years, « Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pointed out. «We are not interested in becoming one of those nations that procrastinated and ended up without gas. We want to harvest the gas and produce billions of dollars in state revenue in favor of the country’s budgetary needs. We have to drive growth forward and natural gas is a growth engine», he said, adding that Israel stands to receive $60 billion in taxes and royalties from the sale of gas over the next two decades. The production will save around $ 4 billion yearly, the sum spent on imports at present. (3)
Silvan Shalom noted the government planned to extend the period of energy independence from 25 to 30 years. Sarah and Myra gas exploratory licenses have failed to produce gas. It has made Israel increase the share destined for domestic consumption. (4)
At that, the implementation of the plans may become a bumpy road. There is no clear sea economic zone delimitation of borders between the neighboring states.The Eastern Mediterranean «gas pie» is disputed by Cyprus, Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Turkey, as well as Palestine striving for independence… The matter gets even more complicated because the states have disputes between themselves, as well each of them with Israel.
Formally Lebanon and Israel are still at war. The Lebanese government has launched a complaint to the United Nations saying Israel is in violation of its continental shelf. Syria says the Leviathan stretches to its economic zone. Egypt insists the gas field is closer to its city of Damietta (190 km) than to Haifa (according to Cairo, the alleged distance is 235 km). It claims that the Tamar and Leviathan gas fields are situated on the southern part of an underwater slope that belongs to Egypt since a long time. Palestine accuses Israel of outright stealing the gas from the Gaza Strip. (5)
Ankara is concerned over the plans to develop the deposits near the Cypriot shore, as well as to liquefy and transport the gas jointly by Israel and Cyprus. Turkey thinks the interests of unrecognized Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) are ignored. There is a slim chance the countries of the region will effectively cooperate to develop the deposits. (6) Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already ordered to create a special military force for gas fields protection. The formation includes missile craft and drones. Israel is in talks with Germany on acquisition of four frigates.Some estimates say the government will have to spend around half a billion dollars annually for gas fields and infrastructure defense. (7)
Minister of National Infrastructure Uzi Landau thinks it will affect negatively the production and cost effectiveness. (8) The existing contradictions with the neighbors will hardly stop Israel from extracting the gas for domestic use. The current instability in the region meets the Israel’s short-term interests. Export sales are an imperative for attracting so much needed investments into deposits development and boosting influential international actors presence in the region. At that, the ambitious world market plans evoke serious doubts.
The ambitions are there. For instance, the Institute for Policy and Strategy has come up with the report called Israel’s New Gas Discovery: A Diplomatic and Geopolitical Nuance or Revolution? devoted to diplomatic and geopolitical implications of the gas deposits discovery. (9) Israeli experts make assessment based on obviously exaggerated estimates of the reserves; the figure three trillion cubic meters has been adduced by U.S. Geological Survey without conducting more thorough exploration research. They say that if the present market trends continue, the supplies from Russia will make up half of European consumption by 2020. The European Union would like to bring it down to, at least, a quarter. If the deposit reserves estimations prove to be correct, then, according to the Institute for Policy and Strategy assessment, starting from 2016 Israel may become a reliable alternative energy supplier for, at least, 50 years. According to these calculations, Israel has the capaсity to supply Europe with up to 30 cubic meters annually and bring the dependence on Russian gas down to 23%.
This is a rather optimistic forecast. It probably reflects the sentiments among some part of military and political elite, though it lacks solid indicators as convincing evidence that the conclusions are based on sound foundation. First, adding 30 billion cubic meters to the 500 billion European market will not result in abrupt reduction of Russia’s presence. Second, the prospects for 30 billion cubic meters export are murky as yet; it could be around 10 billion cubic meters at best. That’s what the Netanyahu government approved key indicators say. The assertions that the liquid gas supplies could improve ties with India, China, Japan and South Korea, and even make Georgia independent from Russia, sound more as a pure fantasy, as well as the plans to compensate the US supplies to American strategic European allies. (10) All this is presumed to be achieved thanks to only half a percent of world gas reserves.
Even very limited exports will engender the problems extremely hard to tackle. The disputes with neighbors hinder coming up with strictly defined gas export strategy. Israel had started to build a liquefied gas production facility along with Cyprus, but the plans were abrogated due to high costs and the protests of Turkey. Then Ankara initiated a joint study of deep water route going through the Turkish territory around Lebanon and Syria. The idea was refused: the Israelis did not want to be dependent on Turkey, which along with the European Union, could demand making concessions related to the Palestinian issue. Then an idea to build a liquefied gas facility on Israel’s own soil took shape. At first they even considered the possibility of involving Gasprom, and then the proposal was shelved due to «strategic reasons» in favor of French Technip. Now, according to the latest reports, the Israelis are getting back to the liquefied gas facility construction in Vasilikos, located on the Cyprus southern shore (near Limassol). By the end of June the Cypriot Aphrodite deposit owners (70% Noble Energy and 30% Israeli Delek Group) signed a preliminary agreement to build a $6 billion terminal till 2019. The Israeli Leviathan is close to the Aphrodite, so after taking a final decision of Israeli gas exports, the companies will join in a pipeline construction to link the both deposits. (11)
There is no doubt Ankara will do its best to frustrate the plans. It can do it taking into consideration the fact of its military presence in the northern part of Cyprus. As a result, the only realistic option at present is starting gas supplies to Jordan according to the preliminary accord, which has already been achieved. The export will not exceed 1,5 – 2,0 billion cubic meters a year on the condition the Arab Spring will not spread to the Hashemite kingdom. That’s how the hopes get dashed when you’re not friendly with neighbors.
Note
(10) Ibid
Formally Lebanon and Israel are still at war. The Lebanese government has launched a complaint to the United Nations saying Israel is in violation of its continental shelf. Syria says the Leviathan stretches to its economic zone. Egypt insists the gas field is closer to its city of Damietta (190 km) than to Haifa (according to Cairo, the alleged distance is 235 km). It claims that the Tamar and Leviathan gas fields are situated on the southern part of an underwater slope that belongs to Egypt since a long time. Palestine accuses Israel of outright stealing the gas from the Gaza Strip. (5)
Ankara is concerned over the plans to develop the deposits near the Cypriot shore, as well as to liquefy and transport the gas jointly by Israel and Cyprus. Turkey thinks the interests of unrecognized Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) are ignored. There is a slim chance the countries of the region will effectively cooperate to develop the deposits. (6) Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already ordered to create a special military force for gas fields protection. The formation includes missile craft and drones. Israel is in talks with Germany on acquisition of four frigates.Some estimates say the government will have to spend around half a billion dollars annually for gas fields and infrastructure defense. (7)
Minister of National Infrastructure Uzi Landau thinks it will affect negatively the production and cost effectiveness. (8) The existing contradictions with the neighbors will hardly stop Israel from extracting the gas for domestic use. The current instability in the region meets the Israel’s short-term interests. Export sales are an imperative for attracting so much needed investments into deposits development and boosting influential international actors presence in the region. At that, the ambitious world market plans evoke serious doubts.
The ambitions are there. For instance, the Institute for Policy and Strategy has come up with the report called Israel’s New Gas Discovery: A Diplomatic and Geopolitical Nuance or Revolution? devoted to diplomatic and geopolitical implications of the gas deposits discovery. (9) Israeli experts make assessment based on obviously exaggerated estimates of the reserves; the figure three trillion cubic meters has been adduced by U.S. Geological Survey without conducting more thorough exploration research. They say that if the present market trends continue, the supplies from Russia will make up half of European consumption by 2020. The European Union would like to bring it down to, at least, a quarter. If the deposit reserves estimations prove to be correct, then, according to the Institute for Policy and Strategy assessment, starting from 2016 Israel may become a reliable alternative energy supplier for, at least, 50 years. According to these calculations, Israel has the capaсity to supply Europe with up to 30 cubic meters annually and bring the dependence on Russian gas down to 23%.
This is a rather optimistic forecast. It probably reflects the sentiments among some part of military and political elite, though it lacks solid indicators as convincing evidence that the conclusions are based on sound foundation. First, adding 30 billion cubic meters to the 500 billion European market will not result in abrupt reduction of Russia’s presence. Second, the prospects for 30 billion cubic meters export are murky as yet; it could be around 10 billion cubic meters at best. That’s what the Netanyahu government approved key indicators say. The assertions that the liquid gas supplies could improve ties with India, China, Japan and South Korea, and even make Georgia independent from Russia, sound more as a pure fantasy, as well as the plans to compensate the US supplies to American strategic European allies. (10) All this is presumed to be achieved thanks to only half a percent of world gas reserves.
Even very limited exports will engender the problems extremely hard to tackle. The disputes with neighbors hinder coming up with strictly defined gas export strategy. Israel had started to build a liquefied gas production facility along with Cyprus, but the plans were abrogated due to high costs and the protests of Turkey. Then Ankara initiated a joint study of deep water route going through the Turkish territory around Lebanon and Syria. The idea was refused: the Israelis did not want to be dependent on Turkey, which along with the European Union, could demand making concessions related to the Palestinian issue. Then an idea to build a liquefied gas facility on Israel’s own soil took shape. At first they even considered the possibility of involving Gasprom, and then the proposal was shelved due to «strategic reasons» in favor of French Technip. Now, according to the latest reports, the Israelis are getting back to the liquefied gas facility construction in Vasilikos, located on the Cyprus southern shore (near Limassol). By the end of June the Cypriot Aphrodite deposit owners (70% Noble Energy and 30% Israeli Delek Group) signed a preliminary agreement to build a $6 billion terminal till 2019. The Israeli Leviathan is close to the Aphrodite, so after taking a final decision of Israeli gas exports, the companies will join in a pipeline construction to link the both deposits. (11)
There is no doubt Ankara will do its best to frustrate the plans. It can do it taking into consideration the fact of its military presence in the northern part of Cyprus. As a result, the only realistic option at present is starting gas supplies to Jordan according to the preliminary accord, which has already been achieved. The export will not exceed 1,5 – 2,0 billion cubic meters a year on the condition the Arab Spring will not spread to the Hashemite kingdom. That’s how the hopes get dashed when you’re not friendly with neighbors.
Note
(10) Ibid
Several loud explosions have been heard in the Israeli city of Eilat, near the Egyptian border, an Israeli police spokesman has said.
"Explosions were heard. Search operations have been launched but we have been unable so far to determine the origin of the blasts, be it in Eilat or outside the town," spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said on Thursday night.
He added that there were no immediate reports of casualties or damage caused by the explosions.
Rosenfeld also said that Israeli forces "are trying to verify if the blasts were caused by Israeli jets that broke the sound barrier" over Eilat, or something else.
In the past Eilat had been hit by rockets fired from Egypt's Sinai Peninsula. And Israeli troops had been accused of killing Egyptian soldiers.
In August 2012, sixteen Egyptian border guards were killed in the Sinai Peninsula. Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas said Israel’s spy agency Mossad was behind the attack.
In March 2012, Egypt’s People's Assembly (lower house of parliament) declared that Israel was the number one enemy of Egypt and called for the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador and a halt to gas exports to Israel.
The People's Assembly was dissolved in June 2012 by a panel of judges appointed by Egypt’s former pro-Israel dictator Hosni Mubarak.
On Wednesday night, the Egyptian army dismissed Mohamed Morsi, the country’s first democratically-elected president.
Blasts sound in Eilat; no hits detected
Several blasts sounded in the southern city at approximately 9:30 pm. Security forces yet to detect hits
Several blasts sounded in the southern city of Eilat. As of now, no hits were detected. Security forces are currently searching the city. Unlike the previous incident in which blasts sounded in Eilat, no air raid siren was heard, nor were flashes seen in the area.
IDF and police units arrived at the area. The Eilat police met with security officials, as well rescue forces to evaluate the circumstances.
Following the blasts, the IDF turned to Egypt, looking into a possibility that any rockets that might have caused the blasts exploded in Egyptian territory.
Shortly after 10 pm, security forces reported that residents need not stay in fortified spaces. The Home Front Command updated the city has resumed normalcy.
Residents reported to have sought shelter once the blasts were heard. "I heard three pretty major blasts. I went down to the underground shelter with my brother and mother; there was a lot of panic," Ron, a resident of Eilat told Ynet.
Carlos, who also rushed to a fortified space, said "we've gotten used to this. We get this twice, three times a year."
"Explosions were heard. Search operations have been launched but we have been unable so far to determine the origin of the blasts, be it in Eilat or outside the town," spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said on Thursday night.
He added that there were no immediate reports of casualties or damage caused by the explosions.
Rosenfeld also said that Israeli forces "are trying to verify if the blasts were caused by Israeli jets that broke the sound barrier" over Eilat, or something else.
In the past Eilat had been hit by rockets fired from Egypt's Sinai Peninsula. And Israeli troops had been accused of killing Egyptian soldiers.
In August 2012, sixteen Egyptian border guards were killed in the Sinai Peninsula. Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and the Palestinian resistance movement Hamas said Israel’s spy agency Mossad was behind the attack.
In March 2012, Egypt’s People's Assembly (lower house of parliament) declared that Israel was the number one enemy of Egypt and called for the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador and a halt to gas exports to Israel.
The People's Assembly was dissolved in June 2012 by a panel of judges appointed by Egypt’s former pro-Israel dictator Hosni Mubarak.
On Wednesday night, the Egyptian army dismissed Mohamed Morsi, the country’s first democratically-elected president.
Blasts sound in Eilat; no hits detected
Several blasts sounded in the southern city at approximately 9:30 pm. Security forces yet to detect hits
Several blasts sounded in the southern city of Eilat. As of now, no hits were detected. Security forces are currently searching the city. Unlike the previous incident in which blasts sounded in Eilat, no air raid siren was heard, nor were flashes seen in the area.
IDF and police units arrived at the area. The Eilat police met with security officials, as well rescue forces to evaluate the circumstances.
Following the blasts, the IDF turned to Egypt, looking into a possibility that any rockets that might have caused the blasts exploded in Egyptian territory.
Shortly after 10 pm, security forces reported that residents need not stay in fortified spaces. The Home Front Command updated the city has resumed normalcy.
Residents reported to have sought shelter once the blasts were heard. "I heard three pretty major blasts. I went down to the underground shelter with my brother and mother; there was a lot of panic," Ron, a resident of Eilat told Ynet.
Carlos, who also rushed to a fortified space, said "we've gotten used to this. We get this twice, three times a year."
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s bureau chief Gil Sheffer
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s bureau chief has announced his resignation, making him the second top aide of the Israeli premier to quit in recent weeks.
Gil Sheffer replaced Nathan Eshel, who resigned last March over charges of misconduct and damaging civil service discipline for harassing a female staffer while in office.
According to reports, Sheffer has also been investigated over allegations that he sexually assaulted a woman more than a decade ago.
However, Sheffer has denied the allegations and said that his resignation is not related to the investigation.
“It was a year and a half ago; the investigation ended. There is no connection between my decision to leave and these claims,” Sheffer said.
Sheffer said that he will leave office by the end of July.
Reports say Netanyahu has accepted the resignation.
In February 2012, the Israeli justice ministry said that it had received information from a woman claiming to have been abused by Sheffer 15 years ago. Sheffer was serving as deputy bureau chief at the time of the complaint.
Meanwhile, Yaakov Amidror Maariv, a security adviser of the Israeli regime, is also reportedly quitting and is scheduled to leave in November. He served as one of Netanyahu’s top advisers.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s bureau chief has announced his resignation, making him the second top aide of the Israeli premier to quit in recent weeks.
Gil Sheffer replaced Nathan Eshel, who resigned last March over charges of misconduct and damaging civil service discipline for harassing a female staffer while in office.
According to reports, Sheffer has also been investigated over allegations that he sexually assaulted a woman more than a decade ago.
However, Sheffer has denied the allegations and said that his resignation is not related to the investigation.
“It was a year and a half ago; the investigation ended. There is no connection between my decision to leave and these claims,” Sheffer said.
Sheffer said that he will leave office by the end of July.
Reports say Netanyahu has accepted the resignation.
In February 2012, the Israeli justice ministry said that it had received information from a woman claiming to have been abused by Sheffer 15 years ago. Sheffer was serving as deputy bureau chief at the time of the complaint.
Meanwhile, Yaakov Amidror Maariv, a security adviser of the Israeli regime, is also reportedly quitting and is scheduled to leave in November. He served as one of Netanyahu’s top advisers.
Only a Few hours after the Egyptians managed to get their elected president, Mohammad Morsi, to leave amidst massive protests of millions, Israeli security leaders expressed worry that the honeymoon era with Egypt is over.
Senior security and political leaders in Tel Aviv lamented what they call an era of “good security cooperation" with the Egyptian president, and his Islamist government.
They fear that having their good friend removed from office, would boost the power of what they called “Jihadist groups” that might be planning to attack Israel.
Millions and Millions of Egyptians took off to the streets of Cairo, as well as many other areas, not in support of “Jihadist groups”, but to express their will, their demand to remove Mohammad Morsi from power due to his shortcomings, his rulings and decisions that seemed to be heading for a one-man rule, a new dictatorship of a different type than Mubarak’s.
Israel’s leaders are lamenting the Morsi era, though short, but loaded with advanced security coordination, but are still refraining from making clear statements, and are only saying that Israel needs to monitor the situation “and hope for the best”.
The current uncertainty, and the worried statements, or the lack of statements by Tel Aviv, focused on a number of vital issues to the Israeli government, mainly the increase of Egyptian army deployment across the border, and the future of the extensive Egyptian activities against the tunnels with Gaza.
They are worried about what they called “Hamas militants” crossing into Egypt via the tunnels, and the smuggling of arms into Gaza, especially amidst the current developments in Cairo.
The officials are also worried about the current instability in Egypt and its effects on the situation in Sinai where armed groups operate and smuggle weapons.
They fear this situation would lead to a significant increase of attacks not only against Israel, but also against the Egyptian military.
Morsi did not only shut down and destroyed siege-busting tunnels across the border with Gaza; he flooded them with waste-water, gassed them, and detonated them.
Of course, the Egyptians realize the danger of certain extremist, heavily armed elements; they did not remove former president, Hosni Mubarak, to replace one dictator with another. And they did not rebel against Morsi to replace him with an extremist.
They are seeking their ultimate goal of real liberation, real democracy and equality.
The Egyptians removed a one-man rule, a dictator, to live in dignity, not to be ruled by another form of dictatorship.
They realize the real challenges, and possibly dangers looming ahead.
The people of Egypt said their word, expressed their demands loud and clear, and those who do not listen to the will of their people, will be removed by the power of the very same people.
Power that did not resort to arms, but a power of will, determination and a clear message against any form of rule that does not listen to them.
They are, and should be, a reminder to every leader, that the people are the work force, are the determining factor, the people refuse to live under oppression, the legitimacy of any president comes from his people, and when the people ask the president to leave, he must step down, instead of hinting to certain armed groups to retaliate.
Senior security and political leaders in Tel Aviv lamented what they call an era of “good security cooperation" with the Egyptian president, and his Islamist government.
They fear that having their good friend removed from office, would boost the power of what they called “Jihadist groups” that might be planning to attack Israel.
Millions and Millions of Egyptians took off to the streets of Cairo, as well as many other areas, not in support of “Jihadist groups”, but to express their will, their demand to remove Mohammad Morsi from power due to his shortcomings, his rulings and decisions that seemed to be heading for a one-man rule, a new dictatorship of a different type than Mubarak’s.
Israel’s leaders are lamenting the Morsi era, though short, but loaded with advanced security coordination, but are still refraining from making clear statements, and are only saying that Israel needs to monitor the situation “and hope for the best”.
The current uncertainty, and the worried statements, or the lack of statements by Tel Aviv, focused on a number of vital issues to the Israeli government, mainly the increase of Egyptian army deployment across the border, and the future of the extensive Egyptian activities against the tunnels with Gaza.
They are worried about what they called “Hamas militants” crossing into Egypt via the tunnels, and the smuggling of arms into Gaza, especially amidst the current developments in Cairo.
The officials are also worried about the current instability in Egypt and its effects on the situation in Sinai where armed groups operate and smuggle weapons.
They fear this situation would lead to a significant increase of attacks not only against Israel, but also against the Egyptian military.
Morsi did not only shut down and destroyed siege-busting tunnels across the border with Gaza; he flooded them with waste-water, gassed them, and detonated them.
Of course, the Egyptians realize the danger of certain extremist, heavily armed elements; they did not remove former president, Hosni Mubarak, to replace one dictator with another. And they did not rebel against Morsi to replace him with an extremist.
They are seeking their ultimate goal of real liberation, real democracy and equality.
The Egyptians removed a one-man rule, a dictator, to live in dignity, not to be ruled by another form of dictatorship.
They realize the real challenges, and possibly dangers looming ahead.
The people of Egypt said their word, expressed their demands loud and clear, and those who do not listen to the will of their people, will be removed by the power of the very same people.
Power that did not resort to arms, but a power of will, determination and a clear message against any form of rule that does not listen to them.
They are, and should be, a reminder to every leader, that the people are the work force, are the determining factor, the people refuse to live under oppression, the legitimacy of any president comes from his people, and when the people ask the president to leave, he must step down, instead of hinting to certain armed groups to retaliate.
The Israeli Radio has reported Thursday [July 4 2013] that several rounds of live ammunition have been fired, late on Wednesday at night, at an Israeli gunship near the Gaza Coast.
The Radio said that the ship was “conducting a routine activity”, and that no damage or injuries were reported.
It added that the army initiated an investigation into the attack. Palestinian armed groups in Gaza did not claim responsibility for the incident.
It is worth mentioning that the Israeli Navy repeatedly opens fire at Palestinian fishermen and fishing boats sailing in Palestinian territorial waters, or even docking at the shore. Damage, casualties and arrests have been reported.
When Israel imposed the illegal siege on Gaza in 2006, the fishermen were limited to only three nautical miles off the Gaza shore. Yet, the fishermen and their boats are constantly attacked even within those three miles; dozens of casualties have been reported.
As part of the ceasefire agreement of November 2012, Israel agreed to allow the Palestinians to fish within six nautical miles of the shore, but unilaterally decreased the allotted area to three miles.
Last May, Israel decided to allow the fishermen to fish within six nautical miles of the Gaza shore, but the Navy continued to attack them even within the three nautical miles.
Under the Oslo accords in the mid-nineties, the Palestinians are supposed to be allowed to fish in 20 nautical miles off the Gaza shore.
Israel Claims Palestinian Group Responsible For Attack On Navy Ship
Israel TV, Channel 2, has reported that Palestinian fighters were behind the attack against an Israeli Navy ship, paroling the Gaza shore on Wednesday at night.
The TV said that the shells detonated near the ship, without any direct impact, leading to no injuries on damage.
The fighters also apparently fired several rounds of live ammunition.
It added that the soldiers noticed six shells fired at their ship, and responded by firing dozens of rounds of live ammunition at the source of fire; no clashes have been reported.
The Israeli fire also failed to hit any of the fighters who managed to escape unharmed.
The Radio said that the ship was “conducting a routine activity”, and that no damage or injuries were reported.
It added that the army initiated an investigation into the attack. Palestinian armed groups in Gaza did not claim responsibility for the incident.
It is worth mentioning that the Israeli Navy repeatedly opens fire at Palestinian fishermen and fishing boats sailing in Palestinian territorial waters, or even docking at the shore. Damage, casualties and arrests have been reported.
When Israel imposed the illegal siege on Gaza in 2006, the fishermen were limited to only three nautical miles off the Gaza shore. Yet, the fishermen and their boats are constantly attacked even within those three miles; dozens of casualties have been reported.
As part of the ceasefire agreement of November 2012, Israel agreed to allow the Palestinians to fish within six nautical miles of the shore, but unilaterally decreased the allotted area to three miles.
Last May, Israel decided to allow the fishermen to fish within six nautical miles of the Gaza shore, but the Navy continued to attack them even within the three nautical miles.
Under the Oslo accords in the mid-nineties, the Palestinians are supposed to be allowed to fish in 20 nautical miles off the Gaza shore.
Israel Claims Palestinian Group Responsible For Attack On Navy Ship
Israel TV, Channel 2, has reported that Palestinian fighters were behind the attack against an Israeli Navy ship, paroling the Gaza shore on Wednesday at night.
The TV said that the shells detonated near the ship, without any direct impact, leading to no injuries on damage.
The fighters also apparently fired several rounds of live ammunition.
It added that the soldiers noticed six shells fired at their ship, and responded by firing dozens of rounds of live ammunition at the source of fire; no clashes have been reported.
The Israeli fire also failed to hit any of the fighters who managed to escape unharmed.
3 july 2013
Lapid (Right) and Bishara
Israeli Radio (Kol Israel) has reported, Tuesday [June 2 2012] that the Israeli Finance Minister, Yair Lapid, held a meeting with his Palestinian counterpart, Shokry Bishara, in order to ensure the resumption of economic talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.
Israeli Tax Department official, Moshe Asher, and his Palestinian counterpart, Yousef Az-Zamr, also participated in the meeting.
The Radio said that the two Ministers held a similar meeting, a few weeks ago, and decided to hold further meetings to ensure economic cooperation.
Sources at the Israeli Finance Ministry said that the recent meeting aimed at renewing economic cooperation between the two sides.
The Israeli Radio said that the two sides agreed, during Tuesday’s meeting, to form a joint task team that convenes once every two weeks.
Israeli Radio (Kol Israel) has reported, Tuesday [June 2 2012] that the Israeli Finance Minister, Yair Lapid, held a meeting with his Palestinian counterpart, Shokry Bishara, in order to ensure the resumption of economic talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.
Israeli Tax Department official, Moshe Asher, and his Palestinian counterpart, Yousef Az-Zamr, also participated in the meeting.
The Radio said that the two Ministers held a similar meeting, a few weeks ago, and decided to hold further meetings to ensure economic cooperation.
Sources at the Israeli Finance Ministry said that the recent meeting aimed at renewing economic cooperation between the two sides.
The Israeli Radio said that the two sides agreed, during Tuesday’s meeting, to form a joint task team that convenes once every two weeks.
2 july 2013
African Americans, including Angela Davis and actress Lisa Gay Hamilton, released a statement reaffirming parallels between Israel’s treatment of Palestinians and discrimination against African Americans living under Jim Crow in the United States, a press release by the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation said on Monday. The African American statement, signed by academics, artists, clergy, activists and a retired city councilman, was prompted by attacks on the analogy between Israel's treatment of Palestinians and the Jim Crow segregation laws that followed Alice Walker's use of it in an interview, and later, her allusion to it in an open letter calling on US singer Alicia Keys to cancel her July 4 concert in Israel.
The attacks came in the form of an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, an editorial in the New York Daily News, and an Israeli government op-ed in the New York Post.
Titled “African Americans Affirming the Jim Crow analogy in Palestine/Israel,” the statement “affirm[ed] the accuracy of parallels drawn between the experience of African Americans in the U.S. under Jim Crow and Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.”
Signatories cited a 2012 report from the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination that “framed Israel’s treatment of both its Palestinian citizens, and those living under military rule in the occupied territories, in terms of segregation and racial discrimination.”
Their criticism of how Palestinians are treated extends to the situation of citizens of Israel, linking to a report by Adalah, the Legal Center for Minority Rights in Israel, which lists several dozen laws that discriminate against Palestinian citizens.
Alicia Keys is set to play a concert in Israel on the 4th of July, ignoring a growing campaign of direct pleas not to perform in Israel from artists including Alice Walker and Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters.
Felicia Eaves, co-chair of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, and a signatory to the letter commented: “It’s completely accurate to draw parallels between the segregation and discrimination of Jim Crow and Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. Angela [Davis], myself and others have made this analogy previously, because our travel to the Occupied Palestinian Territories reminded us of the oppression we’ve faced in the past right here in the United States.”
The attacks came in the form of an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, an editorial in the New York Daily News, and an Israeli government op-ed in the New York Post.
Titled “African Americans Affirming the Jim Crow analogy in Palestine/Israel,” the statement “affirm[ed] the accuracy of parallels drawn between the experience of African Americans in the U.S. under Jim Crow and Israel’s treatment of Palestinians.”
Signatories cited a 2012 report from the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination that “framed Israel’s treatment of both its Palestinian citizens, and those living under military rule in the occupied territories, in terms of segregation and racial discrimination.”
Their criticism of how Palestinians are treated extends to the situation of citizens of Israel, linking to a report by Adalah, the Legal Center for Minority Rights in Israel, which lists several dozen laws that discriminate against Palestinian citizens.
Alicia Keys is set to play a concert in Israel on the 4th of July, ignoring a growing campaign of direct pleas not to perform in Israel from artists including Alice Walker and Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters.
Felicia Eaves, co-chair of the US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, and a signatory to the letter commented: “It’s completely accurate to draw parallels between the segregation and discrimination of Jim Crow and Israel’s treatment of Palestinians. Angela [Davis], myself and others have made this analogy previously, because our travel to the Occupied Palestinian Territories reminded us of the oppression we’ve faced in the past right here in the United States.”
1 july 2013
|
|
Israeli Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon (R) is greeted by a supporter at the Likud vote in Jerusalem on June 30
Hardliners in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud were elected into key positions in the party's governing institutions early Monday, in a move that could create difficulties on making concessions to the Palestinians. Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon, an outspoken opponent of the two-state solution, won the vote for the position of chairman of the party's Central Committee, a Likud spokeswoman said. |
Another hardliner, Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin, takes over the Likud bureau which outlines party ideology.
Some 78 percent of the 3,600 members of the Likud Central Committee took part in the vote, the spokeswoman said, with Likud chairman Netanyahu distancing himself from the process and voting from a ballot brought to his residence in Jerusalem.
Ballots were cast on Sunday, as US Secretary of State John Kerry wrapped up four days of intensive shuttle diplomacy in a bid to bring Israel and the PLO back to the negotiating table.
Netanyahu remains party leader, but his power within the Likud has diminished with rebels Danon and Elkin securing their new positions.
"Netanyahu lost the Likud", read a headline in top-selling Yediot Aharonot daily, citing a senior party official who said that the premier failed to find a candidate who would run for any of the party's key posts.
Hardliner Miri Regev, who was vying for chair of the Likud's secretariat, lost out to Transportation Minister Israel Katz, who has held the position for 10 years.
Danon, 42, had already taken control of the Likud party's conference in a vote last week, a largely symbolic role but one which highlighted the growing power of the rebels.
The deputy minister recently sparked uproar when he said Netanyahu's government was not serious about a Palestinian state -- and that if it were put to a vote, most Likud ministers, as well as other key coalition partners, would oppose it.
Elkin also warned that if Netanyahu were to push ahead with moves to create a Palestinian state, it would create "a deep split within Likud".
A senior Palestinian official said Kerry's mission to restart peace talks ended on Sunday without a breakthrough, although the US Secretary of State himself hailed "real progress".
Likud MPs and the party faithful have been increasingly unhappy with Netanyahu in the wake of the disappointing results in a January general election.
Just before the January vote, Netanyahu announced the party would run on a joint electoral list with the hardline Yisrael Beitenu of former foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman.
But the joint list, which initially had 42 seats in the 120 seat parliament, suffered a major defeat at the ballot box, only managing to secure 31 Knesset seats.
Israeli media on Monday said that Danon, who was opposed to the unification with Yisrael Beitenu -- which Netanyahu presented as a temporary move ahead of the election -- would now use his new position to prevent its finalization.
Some 78 percent of the 3,600 members of the Likud Central Committee took part in the vote, the spokeswoman said, with Likud chairman Netanyahu distancing himself from the process and voting from a ballot brought to his residence in Jerusalem.
Ballots were cast on Sunday, as US Secretary of State John Kerry wrapped up four days of intensive shuttle diplomacy in a bid to bring Israel and the PLO back to the negotiating table.
Netanyahu remains party leader, but his power within the Likud has diminished with rebels Danon and Elkin securing their new positions.
"Netanyahu lost the Likud", read a headline in top-selling Yediot Aharonot daily, citing a senior party official who said that the premier failed to find a candidate who would run for any of the party's key posts.
Hardliner Miri Regev, who was vying for chair of the Likud's secretariat, lost out to Transportation Minister Israel Katz, who has held the position for 10 years.
Danon, 42, had already taken control of the Likud party's conference in a vote last week, a largely symbolic role but one which highlighted the growing power of the rebels.
The deputy minister recently sparked uproar when he said Netanyahu's government was not serious about a Palestinian state -- and that if it were put to a vote, most Likud ministers, as well as other key coalition partners, would oppose it.
Elkin also warned that if Netanyahu were to push ahead with moves to create a Palestinian state, it would create "a deep split within Likud".
A senior Palestinian official said Kerry's mission to restart peace talks ended on Sunday without a breakthrough, although the US Secretary of State himself hailed "real progress".
Likud MPs and the party faithful have been increasingly unhappy with Netanyahu in the wake of the disappointing results in a January general election.
Just before the January vote, Netanyahu announced the party would run on a joint electoral list with the hardline Yisrael Beitenu of former foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman.
But the joint list, which initially had 42 seats in the 120 seat parliament, suffered a major defeat at the ballot box, only managing to secure 31 Knesset seats.
Israeli media on Monday said that Danon, who was opposed to the unification with Yisrael Beitenu -- which Netanyahu presented as a temporary move ahead of the election -- would now use his new position to prevent its finalization.
30 june 2013
Hardliners within Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud are poised to seize key positions in the party's governing institutions on Sunday in a move likely to curb any concessions vis-a-vis the Palestinians.
The 3,600 members of the Likud Central Committee were voting for the leadership of the party's governing institutions which were likely to fall into the hands of activists who firmly oppose the creation of a Palestinian state.
Voting, which began at 0700 GMT and was to last 12 hours, was taking place as US Secretary of State John Kerry wrapped up four days of intensive shuttle diplomacy in a bid to draw Israel and the Palestinians back to the negotiating table.
Although Netanyahu will remain party leader, members will choose who will preside over three key institutions -- the central committee, the Likud bureau, and the secretariat -- in a vote likely to highlight exactly how much of a threat the premier faces from party rebels.
The main player is Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon who is likely to be elected chairman of the central committee.
In an initial vote on Tuesday, Danon took control of the Likud party's conference, a largely symbolic role but one which highlighted the growing power of the rebels.
So popular is Danon within the party that Netanyahu quietly withdrew his candidacy for the role rather than face defeat by his young rival, press reports said.
Two other rebels from the far-right flank also look likely to win election, with Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin set to take over the Likud bureau, which sets the party's ideology, and Miri Regev a frontrunner for chairing the secretariat.
Danon, who openly opposes the idea of a two-state solution and is one of the most vocal backers of the settlers, agreed he had differences with the premier over certain issues.
"The prime minister has no rival within Likud but it is legitimate to differ over principles and ideology," Danon told Israel radio on Sunday.
"There are many who think like me about the idea of the two-state solution," he said.
The young politician recently sparked uproar when he said Netanyahu's government was not serious about a Palestinian state and that if it were put to a vote, most Likud ministers as well as other key coalition partners would oppose it.
His remarks espoused a position firmly at odds with Netanyahu's public stance on the two-state solution and came before Kerry's attempt to get the peace process back on track after a hiatus of nearly three years.
Some pundits have suggested Danon could one day succeed Netanyahu as head of Likud.
The 3,600 members of the Likud Central Committee were voting for the leadership of the party's governing institutions which were likely to fall into the hands of activists who firmly oppose the creation of a Palestinian state.
Voting, which began at 0700 GMT and was to last 12 hours, was taking place as US Secretary of State John Kerry wrapped up four days of intensive shuttle diplomacy in a bid to draw Israel and the Palestinians back to the negotiating table.
Although Netanyahu will remain party leader, members will choose who will preside over three key institutions -- the central committee, the Likud bureau, and the secretariat -- in a vote likely to highlight exactly how much of a threat the premier faces from party rebels.
The main player is Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon who is likely to be elected chairman of the central committee.
In an initial vote on Tuesday, Danon took control of the Likud party's conference, a largely symbolic role but one which highlighted the growing power of the rebels.
So popular is Danon within the party that Netanyahu quietly withdrew his candidacy for the role rather than face defeat by his young rival, press reports said.
Two other rebels from the far-right flank also look likely to win election, with Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin set to take over the Likud bureau, which sets the party's ideology, and Miri Regev a frontrunner for chairing the secretariat.
Danon, who openly opposes the idea of a two-state solution and is one of the most vocal backers of the settlers, agreed he had differences with the premier over certain issues.
"The prime minister has no rival within Likud but it is legitimate to differ over principles and ideology," Danon told Israel radio on Sunday.
"There are many who think like me about the idea of the two-state solution," he said.
The young politician recently sparked uproar when he said Netanyahu's government was not serious about a Palestinian state and that if it were put to a vote, most Likud ministers as well as other key coalition partners would oppose it.
His remarks espoused a position firmly at odds with Netanyahu's public stance on the two-state solution and came before Kerry's attempt to get the peace process back on track after a hiatus of nearly three years.
Some pundits have suggested Danon could one day succeed Netanyahu as head of Likud.
A Palestinian study revealed that Israel collects 40 million shekels ($11 million) per year from Palestinians, in return for issuing Permits and Magnetic cards that allow them enter the occupied territories and work in the Israeli market. The Applied Research Institute ARIJ in the city of Bethlehem revealed on Saturday in a study that the Palestinian citizen pays a fee of 100 NIS for the magnetic card.
According to ARIJ's study, the total number of Palestinian workers in the occupied territories and the settlements reached 100,000 workers who are forced to pay permit fees to be able to work in the 1948-occupied Palestine
The magnetic card was an almost indispensable condition for entry the Occupied Palestinian Territory, although having the card itself was not enough to guarantee receiving a permit, but it is a proof that the people who apply for the permits are not considered a security risk.
According to ARIJ's study, the total number of Palestinian workers in the occupied territories and the settlements reached 100,000 workers who are forced to pay permit fees to be able to work in the 1948-occupied Palestine
The magnetic card was an almost indispensable condition for entry the Occupied Palestinian Territory, although having the card itself was not enough to guarantee receiving a permit, but it is a proof that the people who apply for the permits are not considered a security risk.
Al-Mizan center for human rights said there is a frenzied race between the Jewish Knesset members to devise racist and discriminatory laws against the Palestinian Arabs. The center stated that the latest racist bill was introduced by MK Yariv Levin, head of the Likud- Yisrael Beiteinu government coalition, and MK Ayelet Shaked from the Jewish home party, and it seeks to determine the nature of the state of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people.
The bill, which is referred to as "the basic law proposal: Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people" has received the support of another 39 Knesset members who consist of both members of the coalition and the opposition alike. The bill is currently in early legislative stages and still has not passed a preliminary reading.
According to the new bill, Israel is considered the national and historical home for the Jewish people alone and its national identity is solely defined by the Jewish people.
Al-Mizan center added that more dangerous draft laws regarding the Jewish state would be submitted by other Jewish Knesset members in the coming days in the context of the hectic race in the Israeli political arena to enact racist laws against the Palestinian Arabs.
"The attempt to forge the history through the enactment of laws will not change the truth a bit, as the stones, the trees and the human beings will always bear witness to the identity of the rightful owners of this homeland," the center underlined.
The bill, which is referred to as "the basic law proposal: Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people" has received the support of another 39 Knesset members who consist of both members of the coalition and the opposition alike. The bill is currently in early legislative stages and still has not passed a preliminary reading.
According to the new bill, Israel is considered the national and historical home for the Jewish people alone and its national identity is solely defined by the Jewish people.
Al-Mizan center added that more dangerous draft laws regarding the Jewish state would be submitted by other Jewish Knesset members in the coming days in the context of the hectic race in the Israeli political arena to enact racist laws against the Palestinian Arabs.
"The attempt to forge the history through the enactment of laws will not change the truth a bit, as the stones, the trees and the human beings will always bear witness to the identity of the rightful owners of this homeland," the center underlined.
27 june 2013
Two men were killed by gunfire on Thursday in Petah Tikva, east of Tel Aviv, and a third was transferred to hospital, Israeli media reported.
Unidentified persons on a bike opened fire at the victims and then fled the scene, Israeli daily Ynet reported, adding that the shooting was probably criminally motivated.
The injured was transferred to the Rabin Medical Center in moderate to serious condition, according to the news site.
Unidentified persons on a bike opened fire at the victims and then fled the scene, Israeli daily Ynet reported, adding that the shooting was probably criminally motivated.
The injured was transferred to the Rabin Medical Center in moderate to serious condition, according to the news site.
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Shimon Peres on Thursday rejected the idea of a bi-national state during a memorial for Theodore Herzl in Jerusalem.
"We do not want a bi-national state," said Netanyahu, adding "but let's not delude ourselves, even if we sign an agreement with the Palestinians it won't end the wild defamatory accusations against the Jewish state."
Peres warned that a bi-national state "contradicts Herzl's vision. It threatens the State of Israel's Jewish and democratic character."
Netanyahu was primarily concerned with international criticism of the Jewish state. "Israel is rated as a country with a negative influence on the world, alongside Iran, and it doesn't matter what we do.
"Because it's not about the facts, it's about the defamation of Israel and our portrayal as peace rejecters, war mongers instead of an enlightened nation that is fighting against aims to destroy us."
The prime minister said that the accusations leveled at Israel's policy are "exaggerated and groundless but they still – and it doesn't matter whether we're at the height of a peace process. We want peace because we want to live in peace."
Netanyahu stressed that any peace accord that may be reached must be based on Israel's ability to defend itself. "Without security and the army that Herzl envisioned we cannot defend ourselves. Security is a fundamental condition for the existence of peace. I think that most Israeli citizens understand this and I believe Herzl understood it very well."
Peres on his part said, "The chances for the renewal of the peace process must not be missed. We welcome the arrival of Kerry to Israel in an effort to renew peace and we shall all help him along."
He stressed that Herzl's Zionist vision was based on values of peace. "Herzl was right when he said that a Jewish state was absolutely necessary.
"Herzl was also right when he defined the establishment of a Jewish state as historic justice. The Jewish people, as all other peoples, have a right for self determination."
"We do not want a bi-national state," said Netanyahu, adding "but let's not delude ourselves, even if we sign an agreement with the Palestinians it won't end the wild defamatory accusations against the Jewish state."
Peres warned that a bi-national state "contradicts Herzl's vision. It threatens the State of Israel's Jewish and democratic character."
Netanyahu was primarily concerned with international criticism of the Jewish state. "Israel is rated as a country with a negative influence on the world, alongside Iran, and it doesn't matter what we do.
"Because it's not about the facts, it's about the defamation of Israel and our portrayal as peace rejecters, war mongers instead of an enlightened nation that is fighting against aims to destroy us."
The prime minister said that the accusations leveled at Israel's policy are "exaggerated and groundless but they still – and it doesn't matter whether we're at the height of a peace process. We want peace because we want to live in peace."
Netanyahu stressed that any peace accord that may be reached must be based on Israel's ability to defend itself. "Without security and the army that Herzl envisioned we cannot defend ourselves. Security is a fundamental condition for the existence of peace. I think that most Israeli citizens understand this and I believe Herzl understood it very well."
Peres on his part said, "The chances for the renewal of the peace process must not be missed. We welcome the arrival of Kerry to Israel in an effort to renew peace and we shall all help him along."
He stressed that Herzl's Zionist vision was based on values of peace. "Herzl was right when he said that a Jewish state was absolutely necessary.
"Herzl was also right when he defined the establishment of a Jewish state as historic justice. The Jewish people, as all other peoples, have a right for self determination."
24 june 2013
Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu attends the weekly cabinet meeting in Jerusalem, June 23, 2013
I rubbed my eyes in amazement when I read in The Washington Post on June 20 that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was willing to meet Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) in a tent somewhere between Jerusalem and Ramallah, at any time. I checked several times to make sure I hadn’t surfed by mistake to an old edition of this important newspaper.
Netanyahu’s remarks made front-page headlines in Israel. I had trouble believing that almost 20 years after an Israeli prime minister (Yitzhak Rabin) and the leader of the Palestinians (Yasser Arafat) shook hands on the White House lawn, the very willingness of an Israeli prime minister to meet with a Palestinian leader was still headline material.
The tent, of all places, took me back to the [1974] signing of the disengagement agreement between Israel and Egypt in a tent at the 101 kilometer point [between Cairo and Suez], or, a somewhat different case, the discussions between government advisor Manuel Trachtenberg and the heads of the summer 2011 social protest [in a tent in Tel Aviv].
Almost 15 years have passed since Netanyahu himself sat side-by-side with Yasser Arafat at the Wye Plantation near Washington. The agreement they both signed there said, among other things, that both sides “would immediately resume permanent status negotiations on an accelerated basis and will make a determined effort to achieve the mutual goal of reaching an agreement by May 4, 1999.” Yes, negotiations were supposed to end in May 1999, not to start, maybe, in June 2013.
Netanyahu has learned that calling on the Palestinians/Arabs “to meet any time to talk peace” is a winning media hand.
By the way, four years ago, in his Bar-Ilan speech, he was willing to go as far as Saudi Arabia to talk peace; today, he is willing to devote 15 minutes to the trip.
What exactly has changed in the past four years? Netanyahu knows there’s almost no chance Abu Mazen will enter a tent with him as long as US Secretary of State John Kerry cannot guarantee he’ll make it safely back home. In other words, Abu Mazen needs [Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu] Bibi’s signature on a document that contains a sentence like, “negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians on a permanent status agreement will be based on the June 4,1967 borderlines.”
There’s also no chance that Abu Mazen will accede to Netanyahu’s demand to conduct talks “aimed at bringing about recognition of the Palestinian state as the national home of the Palestinian people and of the state of Israel as the national home of the Jewish people.”
Middle East scholar Asher Susser defines this demand as “asking the Palestinians to publicly renounce their national narrative.” Speaking at a seminar held in Tel Aviv last Thursday on June 20 on the fate of the Oslo Accord (under the auspices of the Steinmetz Center, the Dayan Center and the Netanya Academic College), the Tel Aviv University professor said this demand, like the Palestinian demand for the Right of Return, is a surefire recipe for thwarting the two-state solution and turning Israel into a bi-national state.
The United States, too, understands Abu Mazen’s difficulties in dissociating himself from the town of his birth (Safed) and accepting, in fact, that Israel is not the home of 1.5 million of its Palestinian citizens. The US (and European) position regarding the borders is also closer to that of the Palestinian-Arab stand; Kerry just announced his backing for the Arab League’s peace initiative, which proposes the establishment of a Palestinian state within the June 4 boundaries (along with mutually agreed land swaps).
Strange as it may sound, Abu Mazen has to enter the tent. Despite his troubles at home, and even if it’s the last step he takes in his limping political career, he has to pick up the gauntlet that Bibi threw at his feet.
Abu Mazen is the only man capable of forcing the Netanyahu government to choose one of two options: launching serious negotiations based on the Arab Peace Initiative, or admitting that Israel is not a partner for peace and risking the outbreak of a third Intifada (see the warning by the head of the Central Command, Maj. Gen. Nitzan Alon on June 19), international isolation and economic sanctions, as well as petitions to the International Criminal Court.
By entering the tent, Abu Mazen will also enable us to see the real faces of Justice Minister Tzipi Livni and Finance Minister Yair Lapid, who promised not to take part in any government that forces Israel to choose between a binational state and apartheid. According to research presented at the seminar by economist Avichai Snir, Israel is already paying the price of diplomatic and defense instability in declining economic growth and exports. The Netanya college lecturer foresees a deterioration of Israel’s economic situation, along with the serious economic and social crisis afflicting the Palestinian market.
Unfortunately, it does not appear salvation will come from Ramallah. There are growing signs that age (78) and despair are taking a toll on Abu Mazen. A European diplomat who joined his foreign minister on a visit to the Mukata’a several months ago told me that Abu Mazen couldn’t remember the name of former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, with whom he had met dozens of times.
I thought this kind of mishap could happen to anyone until I heard Yair Hirschfeld, who heads The Economic Cooperation Foundation (ECF), speaking at the seminar. He recounted that a Fatah official complained to him recently that Abu Mazen had fallen asleep in the middle of a meeting with him and, according to the man, “it’s more important for him to play with his grandchildren than to sit with us.”
Perhaps former Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s controversial remark on the day following the failure of the Camp David Summit on July 2, 2000, that “there’s no Palestinian partner” has turned into a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Twenty years after the signing of the Oslo Accord, a better formula than the two-state solution has yet to be found. Nonetheless, when both sides’ opening positions are as far from each other as parallel lines, the time has come for the strongest power in the world to find a more realistic alternative to Bibi’s circus tent.
Akiva Eldar is a contributing writer for Al-Monitor’s Israel Pulse. He was formerly a senior columnist and editorial writer for Haaretz and also served as the Hebrew daily’s US bureau chief and diplomatic correspondent.
I rubbed my eyes in amazement when I read in The Washington Post on June 20 that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was willing to meet Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen) in a tent somewhere between Jerusalem and Ramallah, at any time. I checked several times to make sure I hadn’t surfed by mistake to an old edition of this important newspaper.
Netanyahu’s remarks made front-page headlines in Israel. I had trouble believing that almost 20 years after an Israeli prime minister (Yitzhak Rabin) and the leader of the Palestinians (Yasser Arafat) shook hands on the White House lawn, the very willingness of an Israeli prime minister to meet with a Palestinian leader was still headline material.
The tent, of all places, took me back to the [1974] signing of the disengagement agreement between Israel and Egypt in a tent at the 101 kilometer point [between Cairo and Suez], or, a somewhat different case, the discussions between government advisor Manuel Trachtenberg and the heads of the summer 2011 social protest [in a tent in Tel Aviv].
Almost 15 years have passed since Netanyahu himself sat side-by-side with Yasser Arafat at the Wye Plantation near Washington. The agreement they both signed there said, among other things, that both sides “would immediately resume permanent status negotiations on an accelerated basis and will make a determined effort to achieve the mutual goal of reaching an agreement by May 4, 1999.” Yes, negotiations were supposed to end in May 1999, not to start, maybe, in June 2013.
Netanyahu has learned that calling on the Palestinians/Arabs “to meet any time to talk peace” is a winning media hand.
By the way, four years ago, in his Bar-Ilan speech, he was willing to go as far as Saudi Arabia to talk peace; today, he is willing to devote 15 minutes to the trip.
What exactly has changed in the past four years? Netanyahu knows there’s almost no chance Abu Mazen will enter a tent with him as long as US Secretary of State John Kerry cannot guarantee he’ll make it safely back home. In other words, Abu Mazen needs [Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu] Bibi’s signature on a document that contains a sentence like, “negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians on a permanent status agreement will be based on the June 4,1967 borderlines.”
There’s also no chance that Abu Mazen will accede to Netanyahu’s demand to conduct talks “aimed at bringing about recognition of the Palestinian state as the national home of the Palestinian people and of the state of Israel as the national home of the Jewish people.”
Middle East scholar Asher Susser defines this demand as “asking the Palestinians to publicly renounce their national narrative.” Speaking at a seminar held in Tel Aviv last Thursday on June 20 on the fate of the Oslo Accord (under the auspices of the Steinmetz Center, the Dayan Center and the Netanya Academic College), the Tel Aviv University professor said this demand, like the Palestinian demand for the Right of Return, is a surefire recipe for thwarting the two-state solution and turning Israel into a bi-national state.
The United States, too, understands Abu Mazen’s difficulties in dissociating himself from the town of his birth (Safed) and accepting, in fact, that Israel is not the home of 1.5 million of its Palestinian citizens. The US (and European) position regarding the borders is also closer to that of the Palestinian-Arab stand; Kerry just announced his backing for the Arab League’s peace initiative, which proposes the establishment of a Palestinian state within the June 4 boundaries (along with mutually agreed land swaps).
Strange as it may sound, Abu Mazen has to enter the tent. Despite his troubles at home, and even if it’s the last step he takes in his limping political career, he has to pick up the gauntlet that Bibi threw at his feet.
Abu Mazen is the only man capable of forcing the Netanyahu government to choose one of two options: launching serious negotiations based on the Arab Peace Initiative, or admitting that Israel is not a partner for peace and risking the outbreak of a third Intifada (see the warning by the head of the Central Command, Maj. Gen. Nitzan Alon on June 19), international isolation and economic sanctions, as well as petitions to the International Criminal Court.
By entering the tent, Abu Mazen will also enable us to see the real faces of Justice Minister Tzipi Livni and Finance Minister Yair Lapid, who promised not to take part in any government that forces Israel to choose between a binational state and apartheid. According to research presented at the seminar by economist Avichai Snir, Israel is already paying the price of diplomatic and defense instability in declining economic growth and exports. The Netanya college lecturer foresees a deterioration of Israel’s economic situation, along with the serious economic and social crisis afflicting the Palestinian market.
Unfortunately, it does not appear salvation will come from Ramallah. There are growing signs that age (78) and despair are taking a toll on Abu Mazen. A European diplomat who joined his foreign minister on a visit to the Mukata’a several months ago told me that Abu Mazen couldn’t remember the name of former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, with whom he had met dozens of times.
I thought this kind of mishap could happen to anyone until I heard Yair Hirschfeld, who heads The Economic Cooperation Foundation (ECF), speaking at the seminar. He recounted that a Fatah official complained to him recently that Abu Mazen had fallen asleep in the middle of a meeting with him and, according to the man, “it’s more important for him to play with his grandchildren than to sit with us.”
Perhaps former Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s controversial remark on the day following the failure of the Camp David Summit on July 2, 2000, that “there’s no Palestinian partner” has turned into a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Twenty years after the signing of the Oslo Accord, a better formula than the two-state solution has yet to be found. Nonetheless, when both sides’ opening positions are as far from each other as parallel lines, the time has come for the strongest power in the world to find a more realistic alternative to Bibi’s circus tent.
Akiva Eldar is a contributing writer for Al-Monitor’s Israel Pulse. He was formerly a senior columnist and editorial writer for Haaretz and also served as the Hebrew daily’s US bureau chief and diplomatic correspondent.
Israeli Member of Knesset, head of the Foreign and Security Committee, Avigdor Lieberman, stated Monday [June 24 2013] that Israel should seriously consider “reoccupying and imposing fill Israeli military and security control over the Gaza Strip”.
His statements came during an interview with the Israeli Radio. He said that “should Israel fail to respond for shells fired from Gaza, Hamas will own planes and hundreds of missiles that can strike Tel Aviv and Netanya”.
Lieberman added that Hamas “is not interested in living next to the Jews in Israel”, and added that Tel Aviv needs to “return to the Gaza Strip, and perform a root cleanup”.
He told the Radio that he does not know what Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and Defense Minister, Moshe Ya’alon, think about his “proposal”, but added that they should consider it.
Responding to his comments, head of the Meretz Israeli Movement, Member of Knesset, Zahava Gal-On, stated that Lieberman is trying to wage war by his irresponsible behaviors and statements.
Gal-On added that Netanyahu needs to act on easing tension, and to stop “the winds of war blowing in his coalition”.
Lieberman demands re-occupation of Gaza
Avigdor Lieberman, the chairman of the Knesset’s foreign relations and security committee, has called for the re-occupation of the Gaza Strip to halt the firing of rockets from it. Lieberman, also leader of Yisrael Beiteinu party, was quoted by the website of the network of Israeli radio on Monday as saying that there was no other option but the occupation of Gaza.
He said that the absence of a strict Israeli response within the coming two years would lead Hamas to acquire hundreds of missiles that could reach Tel Aviv and maybe Netanya.
“Hamas has no intention of recognizing the Jewish presence in Israel and thus Gaza should be reoccupied and cleansed,” Lieberman said.
His statements came during an interview with the Israeli Radio. He said that “should Israel fail to respond for shells fired from Gaza, Hamas will own planes and hundreds of missiles that can strike Tel Aviv and Netanya”.
Lieberman added that Hamas “is not interested in living next to the Jews in Israel”, and added that Tel Aviv needs to “return to the Gaza Strip, and perform a root cleanup”.
He told the Radio that he does not know what Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and Defense Minister, Moshe Ya’alon, think about his “proposal”, but added that they should consider it.
Responding to his comments, head of the Meretz Israeli Movement, Member of Knesset, Zahava Gal-On, stated that Lieberman is trying to wage war by his irresponsible behaviors and statements.
Gal-On added that Netanyahu needs to act on easing tension, and to stop “the winds of war blowing in his coalition”.
Lieberman demands re-occupation of Gaza
Avigdor Lieberman, the chairman of the Knesset’s foreign relations and security committee, has called for the re-occupation of the Gaza Strip to halt the firing of rockets from it. Lieberman, also leader of Yisrael Beiteinu party, was quoted by the website of the network of Israeli radio on Monday as saying that there was no other option but the occupation of Gaza.
He said that the absence of a strict Israeli response within the coming two years would lead Hamas to acquire hundreds of missiles that could reach Tel Aviv and maybe Netanya.
“Hamas has no intention of recognizing the Jewish presence in Israel and thus Gaza should be reoccupied and cleansed,” Lieberman said.