MIDEAST MIRROR 23.10.18, SECTION A (ISRAEL)
'I can be tough with Netanyahu on the peace plan'
U.S. President Donald Trump has said he is willing to "be tough" on Israel in peace negotiations, mirroring the administration's combative stance toward the Palestinian Authority, according to an Israeli report Monday. Such a move would mark a significant shift in the U.S. approach to peace talks so far, which has seen a number of concessions to Israel and punitive measures against Ramallah, stoking Palestinian anger and a boycott of efforts to jump start peace talks. According to a Channel 10 news report, which cited four Western diplomats with knowledge of the matter, Trump told French President Emmanuel Macron that he was prepared to pressure Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to accept the administration's long-gestating peace initiative, once it is unveiled, mirroring pressure already leveled against the Palestinians.
"I have given a lot to Netanyahu. I moved the embassy to Jerusalem… We give Israel $5 billion a year. I can be tough with Netanyahu on the peace plan, just like I have been tough on the Palestinians," Trump reportedly told Macron on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in September. It is unclear where the $5 billion number comes from. The U.S. currently gives Israel $3.8 billion annually in defense aid as part of a memorandum of understanding. When Macron told the U.S. leader that he was under the impression that Netanyahu preferred the status quo over making progress on a peace deal, Trump allegedly replied: "You know, Emmanuel, I am very close to reaching that same conclusion." The reported comments to Macron took place three days before Trump, during a meeting with Netanyahu at the UN, said he favors the two-state solution to the conflict, seemingly signaling a reversal in the administration's previous refusal to endorse the formula.
Responding to the report, a White House official told The Times of Israel that "the president believes that the prime minister is committed to pursuing a comprehensive and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians." Trump, the official added, "has faith in the prime minister's efforts."
Meanwhile, senior White House adviser Jared Kushner said Monday that a "reasonable" Palestinian leadership will be willing to negotiate with Israel based on the Trump administration's peace plan, when it is eventually unveiled, and said the status quo was "not acceptable." "If there is a reasonable leadership and there is a reasonable plan, then they will come to the table," U.S. President Donald Trump's son-in-law told CNN during an interview at the channel's "Citizen CNN" conference. He also claimed the administration had made progress on Middle East peace, without providing details, and said leaders on both sides would need to make concessions.
In Jordanian-Israeli relations, Jordan will not negotiate with Israel to renew part of the 1994 peace treaty that granted the Jewish state use of two small agricultural areas along the border, Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi said Monday night, dashing hopes in Jerusalem that Amman could be convinced to reverse course. Speaking to a local Jordanian news channel, Safadi insisted that the Hashemite kingdom would not renege on King 'Abdullah II's promise to take back control of the areas that Israel has been allowed to lease for the past 25 years. "We will not negotiate over the sovereignty of these areas," Safadi said of Naharayim in the North and the Tzofar enclave in the Southern Arava desert.
In Gaza, Hamas appears to be scaling back mass protests along the Gaza/Israel frontier as Egypt renews its efforts to broker a cease-fire. Only a few hundred people joined a beach demonstration near the perimeter fence in Northern Gaza on Monday; a much smaller turnout than previous weeks. The Gaza Health Ministry said 20 protesters were wounded by Israeli fire. The march took place as Egyptian mediators were in Gaza for cease-fire talks. Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman said Monday that he does not believe in the possibility of reaching a long-term ceasefire arrangement with Hamas, emphasizing that nothing short of striking the group with “the hardest blow” is going to improve security in Southern Israel.
Hamas and Islamic Jihad may not have intentionally fired the two rockets at Be'er Sheva and central Israel last week. Security Cabinet ministers told Ynet on Monday the government decided against launching a military operation in the Gaza Strip following the rocket attack because Israeli intelligence determined, with a very high degree of certainty, that the rockets were fired due to a malfunction caused by the lightning storm that raged on the night between Tuesday and Wednesday. According to one minister, there was indication Hamas and Islamic Jihad were embarrassed by the incident and even exchanged accusations before realizing the rocket launches were the result of a malfunction. "We acted very responsibly," the minister explained. "It wasn't right to go to war because of the weather." He stressed that despite the tensions on the Gaza border, Israel continues giving a chance to efforts by Egypt and the UN to reach an arrangement between Israel and Hamas.
Elsewhere, a human rights report released Tuesday accuses both the Palestinian Authority and Hamas of routinely engaging in unwarranted arrests and systematic torture of critics, suspected dissidents and political opponents, and of developing "parallel police states" in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, respectively. The 149-page Human Rights Watch report, which is based on interviews with 147 witnesses, details a common method of abuse and torture used both by the PA and Hamas in which detainees are placed in painful physical positions for lengthy periods of time. Such practices cause distress and trauma to detainees, while often leaving "little or no trace on the body," the report said. The widespread occurrence of such brutality indicates that "torture is governmental policy for both the PA and Hamas," HRW stated.
In other news, Ynet reports Mossad Director Yossi Cohen warned of Iranian expansionist aspirations in the Middle East in a rare public speech on Monday. One of Israel's main objectives, he said at a budget conference held by the Finance Ministry, "is to push Iran out of the rest of the Middle East. It has a strong presence on the Lebanese border thanks to Hezbollah; it has a strong presence on the Syrian border. And it is establishing itself more and more inside Iraq – both politically and militarily. Inside Iraq, we can see the Iranians operating exactly as they are in other areas of the Middle East, by turning to the Shiite population." Cohen explained that the Iranian takeover of Iraq could lead to Tehran's vision of a "Shiite Crescent" from Iran through Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. "Creating a Shiite territorial contiguity is possible for them," he said. He said other countries in the region share Israel's views of the Islamic Republic, with "some even defining Iran as their central existential threat, something the world should be aware of and deal with accordingly."
Israel Hayom reports that Iran is building factories for manufacturing and upgrading missiles in Iraq. The pro-government daily reports that the intense activity in Iraq enhances the Iranian effort to establish itself in Syria and is coupled with an attempt to build a missile factory in Lebanon. According to the report, Israel does not rule out the possibility that as a result, Iraq will also enter the circle of conflict, but is fearful such a development could threaten the stability of Jordan.
Finally, in diplomatic news, Prime Minister Netanyahu hailed ties between Israel and China as he met with Chinese Vice President Wang Qishan for a working dinner in Jerusalem on Monday. "This is the most important visit by a Chinese leader in the last 18 years. It is a sign of our growing friendship," said Netanyahu. "The fact that the Vice President of China came to Israel at my invitation for the Prime Minister's Innovation Conference is a tremendous compliment to Israel and a reflection of the growing ties between China and Israel. I look forward to our discussions." Wang arrived in Israel Monday for a four-day visit focusing on high-level talks on economic cooperation.
ISRAEL WAITED UNTIL IT WAS TOO LATE: Giora Eiland in Yedioth Ahronoth suggests that prior to King 'Abdullah's announcement it was possible to reach a compromise through discreet dialogue. But the problem was not identified in time, because the foreign ministry and National Security Council are dysfunctional.
"Ostensibly it seems that the latest Jordanian move – the King's decision not to renew the agreement to lease the territories to Israel – came as a complete surprise to us, out of nowhere; a thunderstorm on a clear day. I do not like to quote myself, but I will deviate from my practice and quote from an article I wrote more than a year ago, following the tension with Jordan over the Temple Mount events and the incident in which an Israeli security guard shot dead an innocent Jordanian citizen. I concluded the article by saying: 'For many months now, there has existed a situation whereby if the prime minister himself does not lead diplomatic activity, nothing happens. Talented as he may be, it is not possible to conduct foreign policy in this manner. The Jordanian debacle is just another example of this.'
More than a year passed, and lo and behold – we are faced with yet another crisis, with similar features. There are two deep reasons for the current crisis, which go beyond the specific factors that caused Jordan to decide as it decided. One is the weakness of any Israeli institution, which is not a security organization and is not the prime minister, and – in the Jordanian case – at least three institutions.
The first institution is the Foreign Ministry. The crisis with Jordan about a year ago, the fragility of the peace agreement with it and Jordan's strategic importance for us, all required special attention. In my article, I recommended that the ambassador to Jordan be a person of exceptional political and security status, who would be able to be in direct contact with the King and with the most senior officials in Israel. This did not happen. The second institution is the National Security Council, whose first task is to determine the agenda of deliberations in the government and Cabinet. I am not sure this is the case today. There are too many tactical discussions on Gaza, while less noisy but more important issues are neglected. The third institution is the Ministry for Regional Cooperation, 80 percent of whose activity regards Jordan.
None of these institutions identified the problem, even though the Jordanian desire not to renew the lease agreement has been at the center of the public/political discourse in Jordan for a long time. As stated, if the prime minister does not initiate something, it seems that there is no one else capable of initiating it.
The second Israeli problem is the bad habit of waiting until the emerging crisis blows up in our faces, and only then do we remember to respond. Here is an example: In March 2009, a first case of swine flu was identified in Mexico. A month later, the U.S. Department of Health declared the disease an epidemic. Three months passed, and nothing was done in Israel to prepare for the predicament. Only in July of that year, after 30 Israelis had died of the disease, the government convened hastily and adopted a series of hysterical resolutions, including the purchase of vaccines worth hundreds of millions of shekels – vaccines, some of which had by then been proven ineffective.
Another example: In February 2010, credible intelligence was received about the intention of the Turkish government and the IHH organization to dispatch a large flotilla to break the Israeli siege on Gaza. The flotilla arrived near the coast of Gaza on May 31 of that year. The first discussion on the issue involving the prime minister was held only four days earlier. At the time of the discussion, the scope of Israel's options had already been limited to only one possibility – a noisy military takeover. Had the discussion taken place three months earlier, it would have been possible to identify better ways to deal with the affair.
In the current crisis, before King 'Abdullah's declaration it was possible to hold a discreet dialogue with him and perhaps reach a reasonable compromise. The Prime Minister announced yesterday that we will conduct negotiations with Jordan. The issue was first addressed, only after the Jordanian king publicly pledged not to extend the land lease to Israel, which reflects the typical Israel behavior of dealing with the right issue at the wrong time."
Ends…
NOT TO PLAY INTO TEHRAN'S HANDS: Professor Eyal Zisser in Israel Hayom argues that color has returned to Iran's cheeks and the united Sunni front against it has crumbled, Turkey is squabbling with Saudi Arabia, and Israel is sinking in the Gaza quagmire, while Iran ramps up arms shipments to Hezbollah.
"The situation on the Gaza border is still on hold. One moment it seems we are headed for a lull and an arrangement, and the next moment we are on the precipice of a large-scale military operation, which will see the firing of Hamas missiles to the cities of the South and Gush Dan, and IDF soldiers entering the Gaza Strip.
The situation is being monitored not only in Israel and Gaza; Tehran is also awaiting the outcome, since any deterioration on the Southern border helps it divert the world's attention – and Israel's – from its misdeeds throughout the region.
The past several months have not been easy for the Iranians. The sanctions imposed by the United States severely damaged the economy and led to unmatched public criticism of the ayatollahs' regime. The Iranian people are demanding their rulers invest the money in Iran instead of allowing the Revolutionary Guards to waste it in Iraq, Syria, Yemen and Lebanon. But, even more than the protests, the authorities in Tehran fear the possibility that Washington will join Israel, and harm the Iranian presence throughout the region, especially in Syria.
In recent days, however, the color has returned to the cheeks of senior officials in Tehran. The front that Washington and Jerusalem are working to establish against them in the Middle East is faltering, and there is much concern that it will collapse. Just a little over a year ago, American President Donald Trump held a historic visit to Saudi Arabia, during which he announced the creation of a pan-Arab Sunni front against Iran. Israel was meant to be a partner behind the scenes in this alliance, but the axis state on which the Americans pinned their hopes was Saudi Arabia.
The united Arab and Sunni front soon went up in flames. There is a great tempest raging in the Gulf, after Saudi Arabia and Qatar found themselves in a struggle for prestige and honor, which has gone out of control and foiled the attempt to create a united front against the Iranians in the Gulf. Erdogan's Turkey, which also has a role in the anti-Iranian alliance, is in the midst of an exchange of blows with Saudi Arabia following the killing of the Saudi journalist at the consulate in Istanbul. You never know with Erdogan whether this stems from a commitment to freedom of the press, long ago forgotten in Turkey, or a justified affront in light of the violation of Turkish sovereignty, or is this perhaps Erdogan settling accounts with Saudi Arabia because of its hostility towards the Muslim Brotherhood, so dear to his soul, of which Hamas is also a part.
Israel, an important element in every anti-Iranian front, also finds itself mired up to its neck in a crisis with Hamas, and drawn into an unwanted conflagration as a result of intra-Palestinian conflicts. No wonder the Iranians can afford to smile. Unfortunately, they are not content with smiling. Just last week it was reported that Iran had increased arms shipments to Hezbollah, including equipment designed to improve the accuracy of its missiles. The Iranians are taking advantage of Israel's increasing difficulty in operating in Syria since the downing of the Russian aircraft by the Syrian air defenses about a month ago. Following the incident, the Russians handed over to the Syrians the advanced S-300, and in recent days it was reported that they had transferred additional advanced equipment to Damascus. President Putin even declared that removing the Iranians from Syria was not his business. Thus, perhaps Israel's window of opportunity for action in Syria is gradually closing.
The only positive news is that Washington has declared a new policy aimed at curbing Iran's expansion in Iraq and Syria. This is a refreshing change in the American approach, but it turns out that the U.S. is pinning its hopes on sanctions and economic warfare that are less effective without practical measures on the ground.
The Americans must extinguish the fire that erupted in the Gulf between their allies, save Saudi Arabia and its heir to the throne from themselves, and end the affair of the murder of the Saudi journalist, which threatens to undermine Saudi Arabia's regional and international standing. Beyond all the above, action must be taken on the ground. Talk against Iranian outposts throughout the Middle East, and especially in Iraq and Syria, is not enough."
Ends…
WHAT WILL THE NEXT WAR LOOK LIKE?: Amir Rappaport in Makor Rishon describes the elements that will affect the campaign Israel is on the verge of embarking on in Gaza: A blitzkrieg to topple Hamas that will include the evacuation of the Gaza envelope.
"Whenever it may occur, the next war in Gaza will not necessarily resemble the recent 'rounds' with Hamas – the last of which was Operation Protective Edge.
One of the lessons of the previous rounds is that the prolongation of the campaign does not play out in Israel's favor. From round to round the duration of the campaign has become longer. Protective Edge lasted nearly two months. Although Iron Dome made the long duration more bearable for the home front, and made it difficult for Hamas; it was also problematic for us. A long period of fighting requires a huge number of Iron Dome interceptors and ultimately erodes our home front as well. Another way of conducting the campaign is to open strongly, instead of ratcheting up the degree of force in accordance with Hamas' reactions, and without pauses for mediation attempts.
The biggest change will be in defining the goal. In the past, the defense establishment and the political echelon believed that the best situation for Israel was to keep the Hamas regime in place, while deterring it from firing at Israel for a long time. According to this policy, Palestinian unity between Gaza and Judea and Samaria is not necessarily in Israel's favor. If the situation in the South escalates quickly, it is very possible that the goal this time will be to topple Hamas; a move that will bring about a new reality under the auspices of the Egyptians.
In accordance with the instructions of the defense minister for some time now, and in contrast to previous campaigns, the IDF will come to the next war with plans to topple the Hamas regime. This is not a simple military mission, and may involve extensive ground incursions into Gaza. A takeover of the Strip can be a matter of months, during which missiles will be launched at Israel's home front. In any event, the IDF and Shin Bet are expected to mark the heads of Hamas as top priority targets for elimination.
In every war the opponent prepares surprises. The IDF was not properly prepared for the tunnel threat although it knew of their existence. In the wake of massive anti-tunnel activity, especially recently, this threat has decreased, but it still exists. What would be the next surprise? Hamas has invested enormous effort in building an array of unmanned aircraft and armed UAVs, and they will present a difficult challenge. There are also enhanced rockets – even more than the heavy rocket, carrying 20 kg of explosives, which landed a week ago in Beersheba.
Hamas will fire a lot of mortar shells, for which the IDF is still having difficulty finding a complete solution; an upgraded version of Iron Dome is already capable of intercepting mortar shells, but is not a sensible solution against massive fire, since the 'domes' are primarily designed to protect against rockets and missiles. Especially due to the mortar threat, one of the clear lessons from Protective Edge is that there is no reason to persuade the residents of the Gaza envelope to remain in their homes under heavy fire. In case of war, there will be a rapid evacuation of the residents who live within a distance of up to seven kilometers from the Gaza Strip. The Ministry of Defense is prepared for this.
The fact that Ben-Gurion Airport continued to operate almost completely during the long days of Protective Edge is not to be taken for granted. In the next campaign, it is quite possible that Ben-Gurion Airport will be shut down, at least during the peak days of the fighting. This is the main reason why Israel has prepared the 'Ramon' airport, next to Ovda, as an alternative international airfield that can continue operating and will prevent cutting Israel off from the world.
The summer of 2018 teetered for many weeks on the brink of war on two fronts – the Gaza Strip in the South and Iran and Assad's army in Syria. The explosive situation in the North has not changed; the last word has not yet been said, despite the arrival of the S-300 anti-aircraft missile batteries. A war with Hamas in Gaza might spur Syria, Hezbollah, and Iran to escalate in the North, using strategic weapons such as missiles carrying hundreds of kilograms of explosives and possessing a targeting navigation mechanism, or surface-to-sea missiles that would paralyze maritime movement.
Although this is a bad scenario for Israel, since inter alia Iron Dome will have to provide full protection to all the population centers and strategic facilities in the country, the IDF is also prepared to fight on two fronts. Still there is the possibility that we will see more of the same - an exchange of blows and empty threats, or a campaign aimed at deterring Hamas for a limited period of time."
Ends…
THE LAST THING THE SECURITY COUNCIL MERITS: Shlomo Shamir in Maariv writes that even though the director general of B'tselem has a point and told no lies, Hagai Elad's problem was his choice of venue for delivering his speech, which bore no significant results – or even anything close to it.
"The United Nations is a hostile arena for Israel, and the Security Council is the place in which the hostility is expressed in the most grating way. In the United Nations one-sidedness against Israel is routine in the declarative sense of the word, and in the Security Council this one-sidedness is inserted into initiatives and resolutions. The person who approved, confirmed and strengthened this reality is actually an Israeli figure, the director general of B'Tselem, Hagai Elad, who spoke at the Security Council and harshly condemned Israel's occupation policy and the suffering that this policy causes to the Palestinian civilian population.
Not that he is totally wrong, or – God forbid – lied. The problem is in his choice of the Security Council as the forum in which to deliver his speech. There is no precedent in the history of the Security Council of a representative of a local organization, active in its country, delivering a harsh speech against his own country. No one could imagine, for example, seeing a Russian activist in the Council, attacking President Vladimir Putin for annexing Crimea, in violation of international law. Just as it is not expected that we will ever see an Egyptian public figure attacking President Sissi in the Security Council for suppressing opponents of the regime. And of course, there is no point in talking about an Iranian opposition member attacking his country in the Security Council for its support of terrorism.
But Israel, as always, is a light unto the nations. With head held high, in fluent English and visible pride, Elad stood before the representatives of the 15 Security Council member states and delivered a categorical and convicting speech against his own government. The very fact that he was even invited to speak at the Security Council should have been a red light for Elad. But he did not hesitate for a moment. On the contrary, he regarded the invitation as a gesture of respect and appreciation towards him.
But the speech yielded no significant result, or even anything close to it. The Palestinian representative whined and the director general of B'Tselem attacked. Big deal. To this day the Security Council has yet to make even one significant and operative move that will advance the aspirations of the Palestinian people, and it will continue to do nothing for the Palestinians even in the wake of Elad's speech against Israeli government policy. The bottom line is that Elad gave the Security Council respect, even though it is a forum that, at least as far as Israel is concerned - the last thing it deserves is respect."
Ends…
PAYBACK FOR TRUMP AND NETANYAHU: Zvi Bar'el in Haaretz affirms that Jordan's anger over exclusion from the goings on of Jerusalem and Temple Mount, as well as Jared Kushner's snub when discussing a Palestinian-Jordanian confederation with 'Abbas, has finally boiled over.
"Jordan's King 'Abdullah knew 10 months ago that he would have to make a tough decision that was likely to get him into trouble with Israel, the U.S. administration or the Jordanian public.
The question of whether to let the lease agreement for Naharayim in the Jordan Valley and for Zofar in the Arava renew itself automatically, which is one of the options in the peace treaty with Israel, was first debated with his senior advisers back in January. This came amid the large demonstrations in Jordan against the country's new tax law, when there were also calls to cancel the peace agreement with Israel, or at least not to extend the leases.
The king asked then-Prime Minister Hani Mulki to prepare a comprehensive survey on the status of the leased lands, and the conclusion was that Jordan could take the lands back, since it owns them and under the peace agreement either party can cancel the lease agreement after 25 years, with a year's notice. This is explicit in the peace treaty and in essence there was no need for any further research; Mulki's study was aimed at giving the Jordanian government some breathing room to make a diplomatic decision.
Mulki has a personal connection to these lands, since when his father, Fawzi Mulki, was prime minister in the 1950s, he made a commitment to return the lands at Naharayim to Jordan, except for the 75 dunams on which the Rutenberg power plant had been built with the permission of the British Mandatory rulers.
The younger Mulki was fired in June following more demonstrations in Jordan, as part of efforts by 'Abdullah to calm the public, and the tax law was frozen. But the new Prime minister, Omar Razzaz, has refrained until now from making any public statements on the future of the lease agreement. 'When the time comes we will tell parliament what we have decided,' Razzaz told MPs, who were demanding an answer. 'Our decision will be based on the kingdom's national interests.'
Israel was not surprised by the decision, nor should it have been. Not only was it aware of the public and parliamentary pressures exerted on the king, it was also getting clear messages about the matter and had even been asked what its position would be if the king cancelled the agreement. Diplomatic efforts to dissuade 'Abdullah, which involved the United States, were unsuccessful. Jordan, it turned out, had too many complaints about Israeli policy in the territories and in Jerusalem. It was being excluded from issues related to Temple Mount, despite an explicit commitment under the peace agreement to give it special status in Jerusalem and on the mount. Jordan was also kept out of the diplomatic talks with the Palestinians before they collapsed.
Jordan is also angry at the United States because Jared Kushner made a proposal to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud 'Abbas about establishing a confederation with Jordan – without having asked 'Abdullah's opinion. 'The proposal is not worthy of discussion,' said the Jordanian government spokesman, in the sharpest response ever to an American proposal. Jordan sees this proposal as a threat, whose purpose is to turn the kingdom into an 'alternative homeland' for the Palestinians, or as another way to circumvent the two-state solution.
Later, Jordan protested U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to stop aid to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which could spark dissent among the two million Palestinian refugees living in the kingdom, and impose another economic burden on the coffers of a country also dealing with some 1.5 million refugees from Syria, tens of thousands of refugees from Iraq, and public debt of more than $40 billion.
Jordan is also aware of Israel's cold shoulder towards the Red Sea-Dead Sea canal project despite the 2015 agreement signed on this undertaking, whose completion could help Jordan overcome chronic water shortages.
Thus, even if the king could have coped with the increasing public criticism against extending the lease agreement, Israel and the United States had not equipped him with sufficient ammunition to make a different decision. The kingdom's diplomatic and economic circumstances offer it no justification to agree to lease lands it owns for no recompense. Moreover, nationalist and religious groups have been demanding to know why Jordan does not apply its sovereignty over all its territory, instead of allowing the farmers of the Zionist entity to enjoy free land.
The termination of the lease is not a breach of the peace agreement; it is part of the rights granted to Jordan and Israel under the agreement. The two countries have the right to open negotiations now on a new agreement under new conditions that would presumably include substantial payment for use of the land. The next test for Israeli-Jordanian relations will come when Israel asks to begin such negotiations. It is not clear whether Israel has received any indication of Jordan's willingness to negotiate, or, if it agrees to talk, whether the conditions Jordan will set will not be aimed at scuttling the talks in advance.
What is undeniable is the close link between, on the one hand, Israel's policy in the territories and Washington's attitude towards Jordan and the Palestinians, and, on the other hand, Jordan's willingness to go beyond the written language of the agreements. It is true that Israel and Washington can impose unofficial sanctions on Amman by delaying projects or moderating the assistance it receives from American and international institutions. But it would be a mistake to employ this Pavlovian response against a country whose strategic importance to Israel and its security needs no proof."
Ends…
CHINA'S VP IN ISRAEL TO BOOST TECH, TRADE TIES: Alexander B. Pevzner in The Jerusalem Post claims Wang's visit is significant because of its agenda. Israel faces an all-too-common dilemma – how to balance its security cooperation with the U.S., its main ally, against the growing economic cooperation with China.
"The visit of Vice President Wang Qishan of the People's Republic of China, one of the most senior Chinese officials to visit Israel in nearly two decades, is significant because of its agenda – and in the context of global and regional tensions, it may create headwinds for one of Israel's most important bilateral relationships.
Wang visits Israel October 22 to 25 and together with Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will co-host the fourth meeting of the Israel-China Joint Committee on Innovation Cooperation (JCIC). The JCIC, which convenes annually, alternating between Beijing and Jerusalem, was established in 2014. It is one of the key government-to-government platforms between Israel and China – the others being a political dialogue at the level of deputy foreign ministers and an economic dialogue with the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), China's top economic planning body. The JCIC has a broad agenda. For example, the start of the free trade talks and the signing of a 10-year multiple entry visa agreement for tourists and business-people were announced at the 2016 JCIC.
The JCIC acquired additional significance after Israel and China upgraded their relationship to an 'innovative comprehensive partnership.' This was announced when Netanyahu visited Beijing to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping in March 2017, the second such visit since May 2013, which helped kick-start a wide-ranging relationship.
Wang's visit is important not simply due to any new agreements to be signed or the attendance at the summit of business luminaries such as Alibaba CEO Jack Ma. It is also because China decided to upgrade the ranking of its representative co-chairing the JCIC in relation to the prime minister of Israel. It used to be headed by a Chinese vice-premier and a member of the Politburo of the Communist Party of China (CPC). There are four vice-premiers in China's State Council, one of them an executive vice-premier who also sits on the Standing Committee, the highest decision-making body in China. The Chinese co-chair of the JCIC was one of the three vice-premiers. In this case, it was Mme. Liu Yandong, responsible for science and technology and the only woman in the top-25 party hierarchy.
While Wang is not currently a member of the Politburo (nor even on the Central Committee of the party), he is ranked No. 8 in the Communist Party hierarchy (above a vice-premier) and is, of course, a state leader. This demonstrates the importance with which China views its technology and innovation cooperation with Israel, especially in the context of rising U.S.-China tensions. Wang enjoys the trust of Chinese President and Party Secretary Xi Jinping and was on the Politburo Standing Committee (ranked six at the time) from 2012 to 2017 and headed the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection, the party's highly respected anti-corruption body. He is known in China for his financial expertise (he is nicknamed the 'firefighter' for his ability in dealing with crises) and his experience with the U.S. Finally, Wang is one of the most senior Chinese officials to arrive in Israel since Chinese president Jiang Zemin visited in April 2000. Chinese speaker Zhang Dejiang, who visited Israel in September 2016, was ranked number three in the party hierarchy, formally higher than Wang, but he was nearing the end of his career and was not seen as close to Xi as Wang is. According to Brookings, Xi and Wang have known each other for 40 years.
The role of a vice president in China used to be considered a ceremonial one, but not in Wang's case. Wang, 70, had to retire from the standing committee in 2017 due to commonly accepted age limits, but with recent removal of term limits on the position of China's president and vice president, he clearly wields a larger role in China's policy formulation.
Israel-China ties have flourished in recent years. Only this summer, two new destinations for direct flights – Chengdu and Guangzhou – were added to the broadening network. There are growing ties in science and research, trade and tourism. In recent years, China has become an important, if still relatively modest, investor in Israeli technology and a source for venture capital.
Still, China is careful to balance between its burgeoning ties with Israel and its traditional ties with the Arab world. In addition to Israel, Wang is scheduled to visit the Palestinian territories, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates. Chinese top leader Xi Jinping has already visited the Middle East twice since 2012, both times omitting Israel from his schedule. Nor did China mince words when U.S. President Donald Trump moved the American embassy to Jerusalem, a decision seen as acknowledging reality by Israelis but opposed by China, which supports a two-state solution as a resolution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Belt & Road Initiative, China's most important foreign policy effort in decades and a blueprint for a Chinese model of development, includes both Israel and Iran.
Some American sources have recently voiced concern over the growing profile of Chinese investments in Israel, especially in critical technologies like artificial intelligence. Israel faces an all-too-common dilemma – how to balance its security cooperation with the U.S., its main ally, against the growing economic cooperation with China."
Ends…