10 june 2014
Reuven Rivlin
Israel's parliament has chosen Reuven Rivlin, a stalwart in the ruling Likud Party, as the country's next president. It chose Rivlin, a former parliament speaker and Cabinet minister, in a secret runoff ballot Tuesday, over longtime legislator Meir Sheetrit, by 63 to 53.
Rivlin now faces the difficult task of succeeding Shimon Peres, a Nobel peace laureate who brought the position international prestige.
The job of the presidency is largely ceremonial. But Rivlin's political views could be a liability.
He opposes the creation of a Palestinian state, putting him at odds with the international community and even his own prime minister.
Israel's parliament has chosen Reuven Rivlin, a stalwart in the ruling Likud Party, as the country's next president. It chose Rivlin, a former parliament speaker and Cabinet minister, in a secret runoff ballot Tuesday, over longtime legislator Meir Sheetrit, by 63 to 53.
Rivlin now faces the difficult task of succeeding Shimon Peres, a Nobel peace laureate who brought the position international prestige.
The job of the presidency is largely ceremonial. But Rivlin's political views could be a liability.
He opposes the creation of a Palestinian state, putting him at odds with the international community and even his own prime minister.
9 june 2014
Yair Lapied, the Israeli Minister of Finance, called the Israeli authorities to set the borders of the state of Israel.
Lapied announced in his speech, in Hartsellia Conference, that if Netanyahu connects the Israeli settlement in the West Bank, according to the Jewish Home party plane, this decision will lead the Israeli government to destruction.
He added that it is time to draw the Israeli borders on basis of a real peace agreement with the Palestinians. His party suggested that they should freeze the settlement project of the biggest settlements and have peace a agreement with the Palestinians and the Arabic Moderate countries.
Lapied announced in his speech, in Hartsellia Conference, that if Netanyahu connects the Israeli settlement in the West Bank, according to the Jewish Home party plane, this decision will lead the Israeli government to destruction.
He added that it is time to draw the Israeli borders on basis of a real peace agreement with the Palestinians. His party suggested that they should freeze the settlement project of the biggest settlements and have peace a agreement with the Palestinians and the Arabic Moderate countries.
The Israeli government launched an international diplomatic campaign last week aimed at pressuring Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his unity government to deploy his security forces in the Gaza Strip and disarm the resistance, Haaretz newspaper revealed on Monday. The newspaper said the Israeli foreign ministry last Thursday instructed its ambassadors abroad to start making diplomatic moves in the countries where they are serving to pressure Abbas to disarm Hamas and all armed groups in Gaza.
"You are requested to contact the most senior politicians possible in your place of service and to convey our expectation that they let Mahmoud Abbas know that the new government’s proclamation of acceptance of the Quartet’s conditions must be translated into actions, and that the new government must assert its control in the field,” the ministry said in letters sent to its diplomatic missions.
"You are requested to contact the most senior politicians possible in your place of service and to convey our expectation that they let Mahmoud Abbas know that the new government’s proclamation of acceptance of the Quartet’s conditions must be translated into actions, and that the new government must assert its control in the field,” the ministry said in letters sent to its diplomatic missions.
Once a unifying cause for generations of American Jews, Israel is now bitterly dividing Jewish communities.
Jewish organizations are withdrawing invitations to Jewish speakers or performers considered too critical of Israel, in what opponents have denounced as an ideological litmus test meant to squelch debate. Some Jewish activists have formed watchdog groups, such as Citizens Opposed to Propaganda Masquerading as Art, or COPMA, and JCC Watch, to monitor programming for perceived anti-Israel bias. They argue Jewish groups that take donations for strengthening the community shouldn't be giving a platform to Israel's critics.
American campuses have become ideological battle zones over Israeli policy in the Palestinian territories, with national Jewish groups sometimes caught up on opposing sides of the internal debate among Jewish students. The "Open Hillel" movement of Jewish students is challenging speaker guidelines developed by Hillel, the major Jewish campus group, which bars speakers who "delegitimize" or "demonize" Israel. Open Hillel is planning its first national conference in October.
And in a vote testing the parameters of Jewish debate over Israel, the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, a national coalition that for decades has represented the American Jewish community, denied membership in April to J Street, the 6-year-old lobby group that describes itself as pro-Israel and pro-peace and has sometimes criticized the Israeli government. Opponents of J Street have been showing a documentary called "The J Street Challenge," in synagogues and at Jewish gatherings around the country, characterizing the group as a threat from within.
"I believe this has reached a level of absurdity now," said Rabbi Sharon Brous, founder of the IKAR-LA Jewish community in California, which is considered a national model for reinvigorating religious life. "Even where people are acting from a place of love and deep commitment that Israel remains a vital and vibrant state, they are considered outside the realm. It's seen as incredibly threatening and not aligned with the script the American Jewish community expects."
In 2012, when Israel carried out an offensive in Gaza after an upsurge in rocket fire, Brous wrote an email to IKAR members that was published in The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. She supported Israel's right to defend itself, while also urging recognition of Palestinian suffering.
The result? She was overwhelmed with hate mail, and inspired competing op-eds and letters in the Journal from Jewish clergy and others until a prominent rabbi called for an end to the recriminations and name-calling.
American Jews have always vigorously debated Israeli policy, but mostly within the community and with an understanding that differences would be set aside if the Jewish state faced an existential threat. But the discussion within the U.S. has become more reflective of the very broad debate within Israel.
"It's a very old issue that many countries face and now Israel faces: to what extent should domestic debate carry over when you're abroad?" said Jonathan Sarna, a Brandeis University scholar of American Jewish history. "The critics of J Street and the like say, 'Of course, it's fine in Israel because the minute they call up the reserves, all politics disappear. Moreover, they have to live with the results of their decision.' Their argument is that there should be a great difference between what you can do and say in Israel and what you can do or say in America. There are all sorts of enemies who make use of the words in America differently than they do in Israel."
Internal American Jewish conflict has worsened as many Israel advocates have come to feel under siege in the U.S. The international boycott movement against Israel over its treatment of the Palestinians has gained some momentum in the U.S., and critics increasingly draw analogies between Israeli policies and South African apartheid.
The clashes among American Jews are partly colored by the sharp tone of overall left-right debate within the U.S. Earlier this year, the Brandeis chapter of J Street and one of its most vocal antagonists on campus, Daniel Mael, accused each other of harassment and made complaints to campus police. Mael, a 21-year-old Orthodox Jew, wrote a series of posts for the conservative site truthrevolt.org accusing J Street of bringing "Israel bashers" on campus.
J Street has said its opponents often distort the group's statements. The liberal lobby created a "Myths & Facts" page on its website challenging the claims.
Many leaders of the older, more-established organizations say the divisions are not as broad or deep as some claim. Defenders of the presidents' conference argue their 50-member association includes liberal organizations with similar views to J Street, and they blame the lobby group for whipping up a backlash to the vote.
The presidents' conference was formed in the 1950s in response to what was considered a failure of U.S. Jewish leaders during World War II to speak to American policy makers with one voice. Members were expected to keep internal discussion and voting private.
Among the 17 conference members who voted for J Street in April were the Anti-Defamation League, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, and the Conservative and Reform Jewish movements. Twenty-two conference members voted no and three others abstained. The remaining member groups did not send a representative to vote.
Farley Weiss, president of the National Council of Young Israel, an association for Orthodox synagogues, dismissed J Street's members as students with a skewed understanding of Mideast history because of the "one-sided, left view" on U.S. college campuses. Weiss was among the few members of the Conference of Presidents who campaigned publicly to block J Street's admission to the group.
"Their views are not part of what I consider the mainstream of the Jewish community," Weiss said.
"I wouldn't characterize them as enemies of Israel," Weiss said. "I would characterize it that their self-avowed statement that they are pro-Israel is not accurate."
The split among U.S. Jews has its roots in the Jewish settlement building in the occupied territories after the 1967 Six Day War, which sparked debate in the U.S. and in Israel over whether the settlements helped or hurt Israeli security.
At the same time, American Judaism was splintering. The strictly traditional Orthodox population grew, but so did the number of Jews who left organized religious life. Jews were marrying outside the faith at a high rate, and their families were generally less involved in the Jewish community and less tied to Israel.
"We now have more people who care deeply about Israel and more people who care very little about Israel," said Steven M. Cohen, a professor at Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute on Religion who specializes in research on the American Jewish community.
Meanwhile, liberal Reform Judaism, which has worked for years to underscore its deep commitment to the Jewish state, grew to become the largest movement in American Judaism. The result: a pro-Israel American Jewish community largely split between conservatives and liberals, both emotionally attached to Israel but with conflicting outlooks on many Israeli policies.
At Temple Sharey Tefilo-Israel, a Reform Jewish synagogue in South Orange, New Jersey, Rabbi Daniel Cohen struggles to hold the ever-shrinking common ground among his congregants over Israel. Before Cohen delivers a sermon on the subject, he re-reads what he wrote and asks himself, "How are they going to hear it?"
From the pulpit, he tries to weave together the views of doves and hawks among the 850 families in his congregation, comparing Israel to a flawed friend who nonetheless should be defended against slander. Still, he hears complaints — about his personal involvement with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the long-established lobbying group, and his simultaneous support for congregants active in J Street.
"I'm very, very careful to focus on the importance of Israel and the American Jewish community and being involved in activism. I'm not proscriptive about how people should get involved," said Cohen, the temple's senior rabbi for 16 years.
A Pew Research Center survey conducted last year found more than two-thirds of American Jews feel somewhat or very attached to Israel, but only 38 percent believe the Israeli government is sincerely pursuing peace with the Palestinians and 44 percent said settlement construction hurts Israeli national security. (In the same poll, just 12 percent of U.S. Jews said Palestinian leaders were making a sincere effort to resolve the conflict.)
Many Jewish leaders worry the infighting could not only undermine U.S. support for Israel, but also drive away the younger American Jews who are pressing for a broader definition of what it means to be pro-Israel.
"The attacks are stronger and more vicious sometimes ...," said Cohen. "If you're not hearing other perspectives, I don't know how you can have an honest, open debate."
Jewish organizations are withdrawing invitations to Jewish speakers or performers considered too critical of Israel, in what opponents have denounced as an ideological litmus test meant to squelch debate. Some Jewish activists have formed watchdog groups, such as Citizens Opposed to Propaganda Masquerading as Art, or COPMA, and JCC Watch, to monitor programming for perceived anti-Israel bias. They argue Jewish groups that take donations for strengthening the community shouldn't be giving a platform to Israel's critics.
American campuses have become ideological battle zones over Israeli policy in the Palestinian territories, with national Jewish groups sometimes caught up on opposing sides of the internal debate among Jewish students. The "Open Hillel" movement of Jewish students is challenging speaker guidelines developed by Hillel, the major Jewish campus group, which bars speakers who "delegitimize" or "demonize" Israel. Open Hillel is planning its first national conference in October.
And in a vote testing the parameters of Jewish debate over Israel, the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, a national coalition that for decades has represented the American Jewish community, denied membership in April to J Street, the 6-year-old lobby group that describes itself as pro-Israel and pro-peace and has sometimes criticized the Israeli government. Opponents of J Street have been showing a documentary called "The J Street Challenge," in synagogues and at Jewish gatherings around the country, characterizing the group as a threat from within.
"I believe this has reached a level of absurdity now," said Rabbi Sharon Brous, founder of the IKAR-LA Jewish community in California, which is considered a national model for reinvigorating religious life. "Even where people are acting from a place of love and deep commitment that Israel remains a vital and vibrant state, they are considered outside the realm. It's seen as incredibly threatening and not aligned with the script the American Jewish community expects."
In 2012, when Israel carried out an offensive in Gaza after an upsurge in rocket fire, Brous wrote an email to IKAR members that was published in The Jewish Journal of Greater Los Angeles. She supported Israel's right to defend itself, while also urging recognition of Palestinian suffering.
The result? She was overwhelmed with hate mail, and inspired competing op-eds and letters in the Journal from Jewish clergy and others until a prominent rabbi called for an end to the recriminations and name-calling.
American Jews have always vigorously debated Israeli policy, but mostly within the community and with an understanding that differences would be set aside if the Jewish state faced an existential threat. But the discussion within the U.S. has become more reflective of the very broad debate within Israel.
"It's a very old issue that many countries face and now Israel faces: to what extent should domestic debate carry over when you're abroad?" said Jonathan Sarna, a Brandeis University scholar of American Jewish history. "The critics of J Street and the like say, 'Of course, it's fine in Israel because the minute they call up the reserves, all politics disappear. Moreover, they have to live with the results of their decision.' Their argument is that there should be a great difference between what you can do and say in Israel and what you can do or say in America. There are all sorts of enemies who make use of the words in America differently than they do in Israel."
Internal American Jewish conflict has worsened as many Israel advocates have come to feel under siege in the U.S. The international boycott movement against Israel over its treatment of the Palestinians has gained some momentum in the U.S., and critics increasingly draw analogies between Israeli policies and South African apartheid.
The clashes among American Jews are partly colored by the sharp tone of overall left-right debate within the U.S. Earlier this year, the Brandeis chapter of J Street and one of its most vocal antagonists on campus, Daniel Mael, accused each other of harassment and made complaints to campus police. Mael, a 21-year-old Orthodox Jew, wrote a series of posts for the conservative site truthrevolt.org accusing J Street of bringing "Israel bashers" on campus.
J Street has said its opponents often distort the group's statements. The liberal lobby created a "Myths & Facts" page on its website challenging the claims.
Many leaders of the older, more-established organizations say the divisions are not as broad or deep as some claim. Defenders of the presidents' conference argue their 50-member association includes liberal organizations with similar views to J Street, and they blame the lobby group for whipping up a backlash to the vote.
The presidents' conference was formed in the 1950s in response to what was considered a failure of U.S. Jewish leaders during World War II to speak to American policy makers with one voice. Members were expected to keep internal discussion and voting private.
Among the 17 conference members who voted for J Street in April were the Anti-Defamation League, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, and the Conservative and Reform Jewish movements. Twenty-two conference members voted no and three others abstained. The remaining member groups did not send a representative to vote.
Farley Weiss, president of the National Council of Young Israel, an association for Orthodox synagogues, dismissed J Street's members as students with a skewed understanding of Mideast history because of the "one-sided, left view" on U.S. college campuses. Weiss was among the few members of the Conference of Presidents who campaigned publicly to block J Street's admission to the group.
"Their views are not part of what I consider the mainstream of the Jewish community," Weiss said.
"I wouldn't characterize them as enemies of Israel," Weiss said. "I would characterize it that their self-avowed statement that they are pro-Israel is not accurate."
The split among U.S. Jews has its roots in the Jewish settlement building in the occupied territories after the 1967 Six Day War, which sparked debate in the U.S. and in Israel over whether the settlements helped or hurt Israeli security.
At the same time, American Judaism was splintering. The strictly traditional Orthodox population grew, but so did the number of Jews who left organized religious life. Jews were marrying outside the faith at a high rate, and their families were generally less involved in the Jewish community and less tied to Israel.
"We now have more people who care deeply about Israel and more people who care very little about Israel," said Steven M. Cohen, a professor at Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute on Religion who specializes in research on the American Jewish community.
Meanwhile, liberal Reform Judaism, which has worked for years to underscore its deep commitment to the Jewish state, grew to become the largest movement in American Judaism. The result: a pro-Israel American Jewish community largely split between conservatives and liberals, both emotionally attached to Israel but with conflicting outlooks on many Israeli policies.
At Temple Sharey Tefilo-Israel, a Reform Jewish synagogue in South Orange, New Jersey, Rabbi Daniel Cohen struggles to hold the ever-shrinking common ground among his congregants over Israel. Before Cohen delivers a sermon on the subject, he re-reads what he wrote and asks himself, "How are they going to hear it?"
From the pulpit, he tries to weave together the views of doves and hawks among the 850 families in his congregation, comparing Israel to a flawed friend who nonetheless should be defended against slander. Still, he hears complaints — about his personal involvement with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the long-established lobbying group, and his simultaneous support for congregants active in J Street.
"I'm very, very careful to focus on the importance of Israel and the American Jewish community and being involved in activism. I'm not proscriptive about how people should get involved," said Cohen, the temple's senior rabbi for 16 years.
A Pew Research Center survey conducted last year found more than two-thirds of American Jews feel somewhat or very attached to Israel, but only 38 percent believe the Israeli government is sincerely pursuing peace with the Palestinians and 44 percent said settlement construction hurts Israeli national security. (In the same poll, just 12 percent of U.S. Jews said Palestinian leaders were making a sincere effort to resolve the conflict.)
Many Jewish leaders worry the infighting could not only undermine U.S. support for Israel, but also drive away the younger American Jews who are pressing for a broader definition of what it means to be pro-Israel.
"The attacks are stronger and more vicious sometimes ...," said Cohen. "If you're not hearing other perspectives, I don't know how you can have an honest, open debate."
8 june 2014
EU and Israeli officials shake hands during an agreement signing ceremony at Prime Minister's office in Jerusalem, June 8, 2014
Israel on Sunday signed a key European-funded scientific research program despite guidelines barring funding to settlement-linked projects, officials said.
The signing of the Horizon 2020 agreement took place at a ceremony in Jerusalem presided over by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and outgoing European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso.
"Horizon 2020 offers a huge opportunity to enhance the traditionally active cooperation between Israeli and EU innovators. Under terms of the agreement, Israel will have the same access to the program as EU member states," the European Commission said.
Signing the deal, which makes Israel the only non-European country to benefit from the program, was made possible after the sides reached an agreement over guidelines which bar all funding for entities operating on land seized during the 1967 Six Day War.
The guidelines angered Israel because it would have meant recognizing in writing that the settlements -- which are illegal under international law -- are not part of Israel in any future EU agreements.
But under terms of a compromise reached late last year, it was agreed that Israel could add an appendix stating its non-recognition of the new guidelines.
Since the EU said it would stop grants and funding for any Israeli entity operating over the 1967 lines, a growing number of international bodies have taken similar steps to cut ties, in a move that has sparked alarm in Israel.
Israel's ongoing settlement enterprise has been flagged up by Washington as a key factor in the collapse of the US-led peace talks in April and has triggered repeated problems in its relationship with Europe.
In an editorial in Israel's Haaretz newspaper on Sunday, Barroso warned that if there was no forward movement in peace efforts, the EU's "disengagement" from the settlements would speed up.
"If no peace negotiations take place and no progress is made, the EU and Israel will have to address contentious and divisive issues, including further acceleration of the EU's policy of disengagement from the settlements," he wrote.
Late last year, the EU's representative to the peace process warned that if the ongoing peace talks failed, the campaign to clearly label products as made in the settlements would gain pace.
Israel on Sunday signed a key European-funded scientific research program despite guidelines barring funding to settlement-linked projects, officials said.
The signing of the Horizon 2020 agreement took place at a ceremony in Jerusalem presided over by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and outgoing European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso.
"Horizon 2020 offers a huge opportunity to enhance the traditionally active cooperation between Israeli and EU innovators. Under terms of the agreement, Israel will have the same access to the program as EU member states," the European Commission said.
Signing the deal, which makes Israel the only non-European country to benefit from the program, was made possible after the sides reached an agreement over guidelines which bar all funding for entities operating on land seized during the 1967 Six Day War.
The guidelines angered Israel because it would have meant recognizing in writing that the settlements -- which are illegal under international law -- are not part of Israel in any future EU agreements.
But under terms of a compromise reached late last year, it was agreed that Israel could add an appendix stating its non-recognition of the new guidelines.
Since the EU said it would stop grants and funding for any Israeli entity operating over the 1967 lines, a growing number of international bodies have taken similar steps to cut ties, in a move that has sparked alarm in Israel.
Israel's ongoing settlement enterprise has been flagged up by Washington as a key factor in the collapse of the US-led peace talks in April and has triggered repeated problems in its relationship with Europe.
In an editorial in Israel's Haaretz newspaper on Sunday, Barroso warned that if there was no forward movement in peace efforts, the EU's "disengagement" from the settlements would speed up.
"If no peace negotiations take place and no progress is made, the EU and Israel will have to address contentious and divisive issues, including further acceleration of the EU's policy of disengagement from the settlements," he wrote.
Late last year, the EU's representative to the peace process warned that if the ongoing peace talks failed, the campaign to clearly label products as made in the settlements would gain pace.
Israeli Finance Minister Yair Lapid said Sunday that he would bring down Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyuhu's government should the latter attempt to annex Jewish-only West Bank settlements, according to Israeli media.
"Extreme right-wing forces are pushing us toward the delusional idea of annexation, which will lead us to the disaster called a bi-national state," Haaretz quoted Lapid as saying at a conference for national policy.
"I don't know if this is a public relations exercise or a true intention, but we will not allow this to happen. If there is an attempt to annex even one settlement unilaterally, Yesh Atid will not only bolt the government, it will bring it down."
The phrase "bi-national state" refers to the idea of Israel as a country comprised of a comparable number of Palestinian Arabs and Israeli Jews, an idea many Israelis see as a threat to Israel's Jewish character.
Haaretz reported that Labid -- founder of the Yesh Atid political party -- also called on the Israeli PM to present a map of Israel's borders with a future Palestinian state.
Lapid, speaking at the annual Herzliya Conference, additionally presented a new Israeli-Palestinian plan for peace, the Israeli newspaper said.
The plan would involve the evacuation of "isolated" West Bank settlements during negotiations as a goodwill measure.
Additionally, Lapid told the conference that world powers' rejection of Netanyahu's calls to not to recognize the new Palestinian government implied that Israel was losing international support.
"We are in an unprecedented crisis with the United States," Lapid said as quoted by Haaretz.
"This crisis is the result of problematic and at times contemptuous handling of affairs on our side, but it is still possible -- and necessary -- to return our special relationship with the United States to the right path. This will be the first step on the way back to the negotiating table."
Israel announced plans to build thousands of settlement homes across the occupied West Bank throughout the last round of peace talks, infuriating Palestinians.
The international community considers Israel's settlement enterprise illegal.
"Extreme right-wing forces are pushing us toward the delusional idea of annexation, which will lead us to the disaster called a bi-national state," Haaretz quoted Lapid as saying at a conference for national policy.
"I don't know if this is a public relations exercise or a true intention, but we will not allow this to happen. If there is an attempt to annex even one settlement unilaterally, Yesh Atid will not only bolt the government, it will bring it down."
The phrase "bi-national state" refers to the idea of Israel as a country comprised of a comparable number of Palestinian Arabs and Israeli Jews, an idea many Israelis see as a threat to Israel's Jewish character.
Haaretz reported that Labid -- founder of the Yesh Atid political party -- also called on the Israeli PM to present a map of Israel's borders with a future Palestinian state.
Lapid, speaking at the annual Herzliya Conference, additionally presented a new Israeli-Palestinian plan for peace, the Israeli newspaper said.
The plan would involve the evacuation of "isolated" West Bank settlements during negotiations as a goodwill measure.
Additionally, Lapid told the conference that world powers' rejection of Netanyahu's calls to not to recognize the new Palestinian government implied that Israel was losing international support.
"We are in an unprecedented crisis with the United States," Lapid said as quoted by Haaretz.
"This crisis is the result of problematic and at times contemptuous handling of affairs on our side, but it is still possible -- and necessary -- to return our special relationship with the United States to the right path. This will be the first step on the way back to the negotiating table."
Israel announced plans to build thousands of settlement homes across the occupied West Bank throughout the last round of peace talks, infuriating Palestinians.
The international community considers Israel's settlement enterprise illegal.
7 june 2014
Israeli premier Benjamin Netanya declared a unilateral plan to separate the Jews from the Palestinians in the West Bank in order to maintain what he described as the Jewish character of Israel, according to the Israeli newspaper Makor Rishon on Friday. The newspaper said that Netanyahu shockingly tabled his plan during a meeting last Monday with members of the Knesset foreign affairs and defense committee.
Knesset members who attended the meeting told the newspaper that Netanyahu left some of them confused without clarifying how he would carry out such a plan.
Netanyahu also told the attendees that he would not engage in any contacts or talks with a Palestinian government backed by Hamas and that it would be the right time to take such a unilateral measure.
"I don't want one state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea," the newspaper quoted Netanyahu as saying. "Even if the demographic balance does not change to our detriment and there is a Jewish majority, it is still obvious that we need to have a Jewish majority that is overwhelming and for that state to be democratic."
"And that is why we need to come to a separation," he noted.
The newspaper said that although Netanyahu did not table a clear-cut plan, it looked like the 2005 disengagement plan in Gaza, which had been executed by former premier Ariel Sharon.
Knesset members who attended the meeting told the newspaper that Netanyahu left some of them confused without clarifying how he would carry out such a plan.
Netanyahu also told the attendees that he would not engage in any contacts or talks with a Palestinian government backed by Hamas and that it would be the right time to take such a unilateral measure.
"I don't want one state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea," the newspaper quoted Netanyahu as saying. "Even if the demographic balance does not change to our detriment and there is a Jewish majority, it is still obvious that we need to have a Jewish majority that is overwhelming and for that state to be democratic."
"And that is why we need to come to a separation," he noted.
The newspaper said that although Netanyahu did not table a clear-cut plan, it looked like the 2005 disengagement plan in Gaza, which had been executed by former premier Ariel Sharon.
5 june 2014
Israeli Cabinet held on Thursday a meeting to discuss recommendations of Shamgar commission regarding possible prisoners swap deals in the future. Israeli minister of economy, Naftali Bennett, demanded to support the bill that prevents the release of any prisoner sentenced to life imprisonment neither in a swap deal nor in goodwill gestures.
The Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu delayed the vote on the draft law in the last cabinet session. Yehuda Feinstein, the government adviser, opposed the bill while Bennett called to conduct the vote again.
The Shamgar commission was formed by Ehud Barak in 2010 to apply a specific policy on future prisoners ex-change deals.The commission also recommended not to release thousands of Palestinians in exchange of an Israeli.
The number of Palestinians in Israeli prisons is continuously rising, reaching 5,100 prisoners by end of last April, according to a recent report by the Palestinian Ministry of Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs.
The Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu delayed the vote on the draft law in the last cabinet session. Yehuda Feinstein, the government adviser, opposed the bill while Bennett called to conduct the vote again.
The Shamgar commission was formed by Ehud Barak in 2010 to apply a specific policy on future prisoners ex-change deals.The commission also recommended not to release thousands of Palestinians in exchange of an Israeli.
The number of Palestinians in Israeli prisons is continuously rising, reaching 5,100 prisoners by end of last April, according to a recent report by the Palestinian Ministry of Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs.
28 may 2014
Six candidates put themselves forward on Tuesday for Israel's presidential election in two weeks, kicking off the race to succeed 90-year-old incumbent Shimon Peres.
MPs will elect the new head of state by secret ballot on June 10.
"Reuven Rivlin, Benyamin Ben Eliezer, Dalia Dorner, Meir Sheetrit, Dalia Itzik, and Dan Shechtman presented Knesset speaker Yuli Edelstein with the 10 MP signatures needed for their candidacy," said a statement from the parliament.
The window for registering is open until midnight but no last-minute candidates were expected, media reports said.
Peres will step down at the end of July, just before his 91st birthday, following a political career spanning nearly seven decades.
In Israel, the post of president is largely ceremonial and executive power rests with the prime minister.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is dead set on preventing Rivlin from winning and had even considered legislation to postpone the vote or cancel the institution of the presidency altogether, reports said.
Rivlin is nonetheless the favorite, according to recent polls.
Rivlin's biggest challenger is veteran Labor parliamentarian Ben Eliezer, who has held several ministerial portfolios.
Only two candidates have come from outside parliament -- Supreme Court Justice Dorner and Shechtman, a Nobel chemistry laureate.
MPs will elect the new head of state by secret ballot on June 10.
"Reuven Rivlin, Benyamin Ben Eliezer, Dalia Dorner, Meir Sheetrit, Dalia Itzik, and Dan Shechtman presented Knesset speaker Yuli Edelstein with the 10 MP signatures needed for their candidacy," said a statement from the parliament.
The window for registering is open until midnight but no last-minute candidates were expected, media reports said.
Peres will step down at the end of July, just before his 91st birthday, following a political career spanning nearly seven decades.
In Israel, the post of president is largely ceremonial and executive power rests with the prime minister.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is dead set on preventing Rivlin from winning and had even considered legislation to postpone the vote or cancel the institution of the presidency altogether, reports said.
Rivlin is nonetheless the favorite, according to recent polls.
Rivlin's biggest challenger is veteran Labor parliamentarian Ben Eliezer, who has held several ministerial portfolios.
Only two candidates have come from outside parliament -- Supreme Court Justice Dorner and Shechtman, a Nobel chemistry laureate.
27 may 2014
A new draft bill initiated by the Jewish Home and Likud Beitenu members of the Knesset aims to define non-governmental organizations or Israeli individuals who receive funding from foreign countries as "foreign agents".
Under the bill, contributions from foreign countries to these organizations will be taxed and the NGOs will be required to submit regular reports to Israeli authorities. In addition, they will be required to publicize that they serve as "foreign agents" alongside their logos on official documents.
This is but one of several such draft laws submitted in the past three years by right-wing Israeli parties. [PDF]
The bill was initiated by MKs Ayelet Shaked (Jewish Home), Robert Ilatov (Likud Beitenu) and Yariv Levin (Likud Beitenu). If adopted it will practically eliminate the tax exemption enjoyed today by human rights and social justice associations and impair their ability to be financed.
According to the right wing MKs, there are dozens of organizations active in Israel "that receive funding from foreign governments in exchange for the organization’s promise to promote their interests".
"As of today, these organizations have no obligation of proper disclosure, in which they have to present themselves as clearly representing foreign interests that do not accord with Israeli interests," the MKs write in the preamble to the bill.
The right wing organization, NGO Monitor, takes credit for Israeli legislation aimed at restricting democratic rights.
NGO Monitor's "cut and paste" reports aim to terrorize foreign donors, and they are also used by like-minded MKs. MK Shaked, for example, headed the 'My Israel' movement before she was elected to the Knesset. The movement provides the settler's 'Yesha Council' with logistics and PR services.
Under the bill, contributions from foreign countries to these organizations will be taxed and the NGOs will be required to submit regular reports to Israeli authorities. In addition, they will be required to publicize that they serve as "foreign agents" alongside their logos on official documents.
This is but one of several such draft laws submitted in the past three years by right-wing Israeli parties. [PDF]
The bill was initiated by MKs Ayelet Shaked (Jewish Home), Robert Ilatov (Likud Beitenu) and Yariv Levin (Likud Beitenu). If adopted it will practically eliminate the tax exemption enjoyed today by human rights and social justice associations and impair their ability to be financed.
According to the right wing MKs, there are dozens of organizations active in Israel "that receive funding from foreign governments in exchange for the organization’s promise to promote their interests".
"As of today, these organizations have no obligation of proper disclosure, in which they have to present themselves as clearly representing foreign interests that do not accord with Israeli interests," the MKs write in the preamble to the bill.
The right wing organization, NGO Monitor, takes credit for Israeli legislation aimed at restricting democratic rights.
NGO Monitor's "cut and paste" reports aim to terrorize foreign donors, and they are also used by like-minded MKs. MK Shaked, for example, headed the 'My Israel' movement before she was elected to the Knesset. The movement provides the settler's 'Yesha Council' with logistics and PR services.
26 may 2014
By Khalid Amayreh in occupied Palestine
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials have blamed "anti-Israeli incitement" by Palestinians and their supporters for the killing of two Israeli tourists in Brussels this week.
Israeli and Zionist media described the incident as “anti-Semitic." However, as of this time, there is no solid evidence linking the attack to Palestinians or Muslims.
To begin with, we condemn attacks on innocent Jews in the strongest terms. We also voice our principled rejection of anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and all other forms of racism.
Having made this issue abundantly clear, I believe we must not lump anti-Semitism (hating Jews for being Jews) with legitimate criticisms of Israel, a manifestly criminal, bellicose state that practices apartheid and indulges in abominable acts of ethnic cleansing and persecution against the Palestinian people.
We know and every honest human being under the sun ought to know that Israeli criminality, which often assumes pornographic proportions, does produce certain regrettable but inevitable impacts on people around the world.
Intellectually-honest and morally-sound people, irrespective of their cultural or religious backgrounds, don't love watching heavily armed crack soldiers train their rifles at and shoot young children and boys. Yet this is what the Israeli occupation soldiers have been doing to the Palestinians since time immemorial.
Just last week, Israeli soldiers shot and killed two young Palestinian boys in the northern West Bank. One Israeli human rights organization described the killings as "totally unjustified." Eye-witnesses termed the incident "a cold-blooded murder." The incident is one of thousands of similar "incidents" in which Israeli troops murdered innocent Palestinians for the purpose of casting fear and terror in the hearts of our people.
As usual, Israeli officials, including Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon, sought to evade responsibility, resorting to lying and concocting narratives about the incident that have absolutely nothing to do with truth.
I am not suggesting that the murder of two young Palestinians by trigger-happy Israeli soldiers justified the killing of the two Israeli tourists in Brussels.
However, I do believe that Israel, which murders our people knowingly and deliberately almost on a daily basis, has no moral high ground to stand on or boast about.
Israeli crimes, which assume numerous forms, all of them ugly and nefarious, constitute an eternal indictment of the Jewish state and its political and security officials.
We Palestinians don't hate Israel because Israel is Jewish. We rather hate Israel because Israel happens to be our oppressor and grave-digger, and I am not speaking metaphorically.
Indeed, honest, conscientious Jews who reject oppression are our natural allies against this criminal entity, called Israel.
In the final analysis, Israel's evil practices against the Palestinian people, whose homeland has been stolen by a powerful Zionist movement supported by immoral western powers, are responsible, at least in part, for attacks on Israelis and Jews around the world.
Hence, the regrettable but inevitable conclusion that such attacks, as the one that took place in Brussels a few days ago, would continue.
It is not true at all that "Palestinian incitement" is the reason for the occurrence of such incidents. The Palestinians are tormented so much by Israel's enduring occupation of their homeland that Israel stands morally naked before the entire world. The Palestinians are only voicing their endless pain and agony. Is Israel trying to rob us of our natural right to communicate our suffering to the world?
Even erstwhile friends of Israel in Europe and North America have come to reach the conclusion, namely that Israel is indulging in crimes against humanity against its Palestinian subjects.
Netanyahu and other Zionist leaders ought to realize that the increasing exposition of Israeli criminality is not attributed to "hazbara flaws" on Israel's and her supporters' part.
But we are living in the age of the internet, unlike the 1960s and 1970s when Jewish-dominated or Jewish-influenced media around the world succeeded, by and large, in changing the black into white and the big lie into a "truth" glorified by millions of misinformed westerners.
Once again, Israel is morally unfit to complain about the murder of Jews anywhere in the world if only because its Nazi-like army and security forces indulge in acts that are far more diabolical.
A final word. Some Israeli officials and spokespersons are prompted to cite the murderous killings by Bashar al-Assad's regime of Syrian civilians in order to extenuate the gravity of Israeli crimes.
But this is a sinister red herring, because the crimes of the fascist regime in Damascus against its own people in no way justify Israeli crimes against the Palestinians.
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and other Israeli officials have blamed "anti-Israeli incitement" by Palestinians and their supporters for the killing of two Israeli tourists in Brussels this week.
Israeli and Zionist media described the incident as “anti-Semitic." However, as of this time, there is no solid evidence linking the attack to Palestinians or Muslims.
To begin with, we condemn attacks on innocent Jews in the strongest terms. We also voice our principled rejection of anti-Semitism, Islamophobia and all other forms of racism.
Having made this issue abundantly clear, I believe we must not lump anti-Semitism (hating Jews for being Jews) with legitimate criticisms of Israel, a manifestly criminal, bellicose state that practices apartheid and indulges in abominable acts of ethnic cleansing and persecution against the Palestinian people.
We know and every honest human being under the sun ought to know that Israeli criminality, which often assumes pornographic proportions, does produce certain regrettable but inevitable impacts on people around the world.
Intellectually-honest and morally-sound people, irrespective of their cultural or religious backgrounds, don't love watching heavily armed crack soldiers train their rifles at and shoot young children and boys. Yet this is what the Israeli occupation soldiers have been doing to the Palestinians since time immemorial.
Just last week, Israeli soldiers shot and killed two young Palestinian boys in the northern West Bank. One Israeli human rights organization described the killings as "totally unjustified." Eye-witnesses termed the incident "a cold-blooded murder." The incident is one of thousands of similar "incidents" in which Israeli troops murdered innocent Palestinians for the purpose of casting fear and terror in the hearts of our people.
As usual, Israeli officials, including Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon, sought to evade responsibility, resorting to lying and concocting narratives about the incident that have absolutely nothing to do with truth.
I am not suggesting that the murder of two young Palestinians by trigger-happy Israeli soldiers justified the killing of the two Israeli tourists in Brussels.
However, I do believe that Israel, which murders our people knowingly and deliberately almost on a daily basis, has no moral high ground to stand on or boast about.
Israeli crimes, which assume numerous forms, all of them ugly and nefarious, constitute an eternal indictment of the Jewish state and its political and security officials.
We Palestinians don't hate Israel because Israel is Jewish. We rather hate Israel because Israel happens to be our oppressor and grave-digger, and I am not speaking metaphorically.
Indeed, honest, conscientious Jews who reject oppression are our natural allies against this criminal entity, called Israel.
In the final analysis, Israel's evil practices against the Palestinian people, whose homeland has been stolen by a powerful Zionist movement supported by immoral western powers, are responsible, at least in part, for attacks on Israelis and Jews around the world.
Hence, the regrettable but inevitable conclusion that such attacks, as the one that took place in Brussels a few days ago, would continue.
It is not true at all that "Palestinian incitement" is the reason for the occurrence of such incidents. The Palestinians are tormented so much by Israel's enduring occupation of their homeland that Israel stands morally naked before the entire world. The Palestinians are only voicing their endless pain and agony. Is Israel trying to rob us of our natural right to communicate our suffering to the world?
Even erstwhile friends of Israel in Europe and North America have come to reach the conclusion, namely that Israel is indulging in crimes against humanity against its Palestinian subjects.
Netanyahu and other Zionist leaders ought to realize that the increasing exposition of Israeli criminality is not attributed to "hazbara flaws" on Israel's and her supporters' part.
But we are living in the age of the internet, unlike the 1960s and 1970s when Jewish-dominated or Jewish-influenced media around the world succeeded, by and large, in changing the black into white and the big lie into a "truth" glorified by millions of misinformed westerners.
Once again, Israel is morally unfit to complain about the murder of Jews anywhere in the world if only because its Nazi-like army and security forces indulge in acts that are far more diabolical.
A final word. Some Israeli officials and spokespersons are prompted to cite the murderous killings by Bashar al-Assad's regime of Syrian civilians in order to extenuate the gravity of Israeli crimes.
But this is a sinister red herring, because the crimes of the fascist regime in Damascus against its own people in no way justify Israeli crimes against the Palestinians.
25 may 2014
Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has boasted about how he has defied the United States by building Jewish squatter colonies “in a smart way, in a quiet way”, +972 Magazine’s Noam Sheizaf reports.
Addressing young Likud supporters, Netanyahu said: “I was threatened in Washington: ‘not one brick’ [of Jewish squatter colony construction]… after five years, we built a little more than one brick…”
Asked “about peace talks with the Palestinians”, Netanyahu joked: “about the – what?” to which the audience responded by breaking out into laughter.
According to Sheizaf, Netanyahu’s quotes were posted online by Akiva Lamm, a Likud member from Kiryat Arba, a Jewish squatter colony near Hebron. Sheizaf reports that Lamm had asked Netanyahu a question on the lack of new construction in his home squatter colony, and on Israel’s prisoner releases during the American-led negotiations with the Palestinians. This was Netanyahu’s reply – as translated by Sheizaf:
When I entered the Prime Minister’s Office for my second term, I was summoned to Washington. “Not one brick,” they told me [referring to squatter colony construction in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem]. I was threatened specifically: “Not one brick.” The pressure from the international community and the Americans was enormous. I don’t think anyone in Israel was under such pressure. And still, after five years on the job, we built a little more than “one brick”. But the important thing is to do it in a smart way, in a quiet way, without inflammatory statements.
Do you think it’s a problem for me to say, “I am a hero, I am strong, I don’t care about anything, what do I care what the world says?’” I don’t have any problem saying that, but it would be a lie. Whoever tells you that doesn’t deserve to be prime minister; he is a populist. This is not a feature leader. A leader knows to stand up to international pressure by manoeuvring.
Imagine yourself standing on a hill overlooking the whole valley. You get to see all the obstacles below from above – some from the right and some from the left – and then when you walk down, you know exactly where to go in order to avoid the obstacles. What matters is that we continue to head straight toward our goal, even if one time we walk right and another time walk left.
Sheizaf relates that Netanyahu then went on to speak about how important US support is, and how well his speeches were received by the US Congress. This, he said, reminded Lamm of similar remarks Netanyahu made 10 years ago, when he explained how he was able to manipulate the Clinton administration and debunk the Oslo accords.
What will it take for the American people to wake up and realize that Israel is not only devouring their hard-earned tax dollars to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity, but, for gratitude, is spitting in their faces and boasting about taking the US for a ride?
Addressing young Likud supporters, Netanyahu said: “I was threatened in Washington: ‘not one brick’ [of Jewish squatter colony construction]… after five years, we built a little more than one brick…”
Asked “about peace talks with the Palestinians”, Netanyahu joked: “about the – what?” to which the audience responded by breaking out into laughter.
According to Sheizaf, Netanyahu’s quotes were posted online by Akiva Lamm, a Likud member from Kiryat Arba, a Jewish squatter colony near Hebron. Sheizaf reports that Lamm had asked Netanyahu a question on the lack of new construction in his home squatter colony, and on Israel’s prisoner releases during the American-led negotiations with the Palestinians. This was Netanyahu’s reply – as translated by Sheizaf:
When I entered the Prime Minister’s Office for my second term, I was summoned to Washington. “Not one brick,” they told me [referring to squatter colony construction in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem]. I was threatened specifically: “Not one brick.” The pressure from the international community and the Americans was enormous. I don’t think anyone in Israel was under such pressure. And still, after five years on the job, we built a little more than “one brick”. But the important thing is to do it in a smart way, in a quiet way, without inflammatory statements.
Do you think it’s a problem for me to say, “I am a hero, I am strong, I don’t care about anything, what do I care what the world says?’” I don’t have any problem saying that, but it would be a lie. Whoever tells you that doesn’t deserve to be prime minister; he is a populist. This is not a feature leader. A leader knows to stand up to international pressure by manoeuvring.
Imagine yourself standing on a hill overlooking the whole valley. You get to see all the obstacles below from above – some from the right and some from the left – and then when you walk down, you know exactly where to go in order to avoid the obstacles. What matters is that we continue to head straight toward our goal, even if one time we walk right and another time walk left.
Sheizaf relates that Netanyahu then went on to speak about how important US support is, and how well his speeches were received by the US Congress. This, he said, reminded Lamm of similar remarks Netanyahu made 10 years ago, when he explained how he was able to manipulate the Clinton administration and debunk the Oslo accords.
What will it take for the American people to wake up and realize that Israel is not only devouring their hard-earned tax dollars to commit war crimes and crimes against humanity, but, for gratitude, is spitting in their faces and boasting about taking the US for a ride?
The Follow-up Committee on Arab Education in the pre-1948 occupied Palestine (Israel) stated that the Arab schools in Israel suffered from the lack of classrooms compared with the Jewish schools.
The committee explained that the Arab schools lack 6500 classrooms, which negatively affected on the educational level of students.
The Israeli authorities refused to give permissions for establishing Arab schools and classrooms. The committee added.
Head of the Mosawa Center for Arab Rights in Israel, Jafar Farah pointed out that the administration of the Arab schools used the schools' laboratories, teachers' rest rooms and public libraries as classrooms to overcome the lack.
''Due to this fact, there are many students who dropped out the schools,'' Farah expressed dismay.
In this respect, the Israeli MP Jamal Zahalka said that the fair investment of the Arab educational institutions would solve the ongoing problem.
Taub Center for Social Policy Studies stated that the Israeli Arabs accounted for 24.2% of all elementary school children in 2000, a figure that grew to 27% in 2013.
The committee explained that the Arab schools lack 6500 classrooms, which negatively affected on the educational level of students.
The Israeli authorities refused to give permissions for establishing Arab schools and classrooms. The committee added.
Head of the Mosawa Center for Arab Rights in Israel, Jafar Farah pointed out that the administration of the Arab schools used the schools' laboratories, teachers' rest rooms and public libraries as classrooms to overcome the lack.
''Due to this fact, there are many students who dropped out the schools,'' Farah expressed dismay.
In this respect, the Israeli MP Jamal Zahalka said that the fair investment of the Arab educational institutions would solve the ongoing problem.
Taub Center for Social Policy Studies stated that the Israeli Arabs accounted for 24.2% of all elementary school children in 2000, a figure that grew to 27% in 2013.