MIDEAST MIRROR 26.10.18, SECTION A (ISRAEL)
A Gaza deal?
The Egyptian delegation that visited Tel Aviv, Gaza and Ramallah in recent days has reportedly orchestrated an understanding between Israel and Hamas that would stop all violence from the Strip, including incendiary balloons and the flare-ups at the border fence. Sources told the London-based al-Hayat that Egypt has conveyed a message to senior officials in Gaza and the West Bank that all parties should refrain from escalating the situation, Channel 10 news reported. The sources clarified that the agreement did not amount to a ceasefire and that Palestinians will be able to continue weekly demonstrations at the border with Israel, but they will not commit acts of violence such as trying to breach the border, flying incendiary balloons or throwing Molotov cocktails at Israeli troops stationed in the area. Israel has pledged in return to expand the maritime zone for permitted fishing off the Gaza coast, allow fuel to be supplied to the coastal enclave and extend the number of hours electricity is supplied. It will allow the United Nations to carry out infrastructure projects in Gaza. Sources told al-Hayat that Hamas and Islamic Jihad have accepted the terms of the offer. The Egyptians have reportedly pledged to the Palestinian Authority, which opposes an agreement between Israel and Hamas without Palestinian reconciliation; that they will work to reinstate the PA in Gaza. Egypt has recently tried to revive the reconciliation process between Hamas and Fatah, hosting leaders from the two rival factions for separate talks in Cairo in the past month.
Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman on Friday said he was "hopeful" that the Gaza Strip would be calm over the coming weekend, without clashes between Palestinians and Israeli troops, following weeks of heightened tensions and two flare-ups that threatened to lead Israel and the Hamas terror group to war. "I am hopeful and I anticipate that this Friday will pass more quietly – that's what we need to hope for," the defense minister said. Lieberman made his remarks in Kibbutz Kerem Shalom, next to the Gaza border, where he met with the heads of local governments to discuss the current strained security situation in the Strip.
Jordan said Thursday its decision to end a pair of land leases with Israel would not affect the decades-old peace agreement between the two countries, seeking to calm fears in Jerusalem that ties could be downgraded. King 'Abdullah announced Sunday that Amman would not renew an agreement to lease two parcels of land on the border to Israel for agriculture use, which it has done for the past 24 years as part of an annex of the peace treaty signed in 1994. Officials in Jerusalem feared that the move signaled Jordan's desire to effectively reduce diplomatic ties with Israel. Many saw it as a reflection of intense domestic pressure that still largely views Israel as an enemy. Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi told Reuters that Amman had never planned to extend the land leases indefinitely.
Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman rejected reported demands by Moscow that Israel give the Russian military additional warning before carrying out airstrikes in Syria. "We will not accept any restrictions on our freedom of operation, and when it comes to national security, we will take action," Lieberman told Army Radio in an interview. He indicated that Israel has carried out more airstrikes in Syria than have been attributed to it by foreign media. "Just because the media did not report on Syria strikes does not mean there were none," Lieberman said. "I don't think it's our duty to report what the army must do. An army needs to act."
The Trump administration's envoy to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process will travel to Israel next week to meet with officials, as the White House prepares to release its peace plan and attempts to calm the situation at the Gaza border. "I can confirm that Special Representative Jason Greenblatt will be traveling to Israel this coming week," a White House official told The Times of Israel on Thursday. "This trip reflects the administration's commitment to productive engagement, as well as the value it places on understanding the situation on the ground, especially amid recent tensions." Greenblatt's agenda is not yet clear, but he is likely to meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu, though not with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud 'Abbas.
In political news, a poll by Channel 10 news finds that Likud would suffer, though not by much, were it led by former minister Gideon Sa'ar instead of Binyamin Netanyahu. According to the survey, Netanyahu's Likud would win 30 seats, and Sa'ar's 25. The five seats would go to Jewish Home and Yisrael Beitenu. Considering that both these parties are natural coalition partners of Likud, the difference in terms of coalition-formation calculus is minimal. Meanwhile, fallout from the radioactive Netanyahu/Sa'ar (and President Reuven Rivlin) brouhaha is continuing to pulsate through the press. Moti Tuchfeld from Israel Hayom, who kicked off the whole story by taking the bait and reporting on the supposed coup plot between Sa'ar and Rivlin, writes that Netanyahu did not have a beef with the fact that he could lose, but that he could win and the will of the people for him to remain in power might not be realized. Netanyahu does not have many friends in the press. Even former aide Yoaz Hendel writes scathingly in Yedioth Ahronoth, accusing Likud of suffering from mass delusions. Haaretz's Yossi Verter goes through the list of putsch attempts claimed by Netanyahu, back to the 1993 cassette affair, through a claim in 2009 that then-President Shimon Peres would do everything to give the government to "the left," to Netanyahu's claim that brought down the government in 2014 that Yair Lapid and Tzipi Livni were plotting against him.
In domestic news, Police said Friday morning they are investigating an apparent hate crime in the Northern town of Yafa an-Naseriyye in the Galilee after residents reported that around 20 cars and two houses were vandalized overnight. Police said the vehicles had their tires punctured and were sprayed with anti-Arab graffiti, and the walls of two houses were daubed with Stars of David as well as Hebrew slogans including "revenge," and "price tag." "Price tag" refers to vandalism and other hate crimes carried out by Jewish ultra-nationalists ostensibly in retaliation for Palestinian violence or government policies perceived as hostile to the settler movement. Mosques, churches, dovish Israeli groups, and even Israeli military bases have been targeted by nationalist vandals in recent years.
A report by Haaretz names former Barack Obama and Harry Reid aide Caroline Tess as a previously unknown third target by private Israeli intelligence firm Black Cube during an operation that went after Iran deal backers in the administration. Previous reports listed Ben Rhodes and Colin Kahl as targets. The report claims that the operation was not meant to discredit the deal on behalf of Trump's people, but was actually a scheme to get info for a lawsuit to claim seized Iranian assets as part of terrorism judgments.
Finally, Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman on Friday announced that Maj. Gen. Aviv Kochavi was his top candidate for the next commander of the Israel Defense Forces, according to The Times of Israel, ending a months-long selection process. Kochavi, who now serves as IDF deputy chief of staff, will need to be approved first by an official vetting committee and then by the cabinet before he can take over the post from Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot, who has been in the position since 2015. Deputy Chief of Staff Kochavi was seen as a front-runner for the position, having served as the head of the IDF Northern Command and head of Military Intelligence, following years as a field commander in the Paratroopers Brigade. He beat out the other three candidates who were considered for the position: Maj. Gen. Yair Golan, Maj. Gen. Nitzan Alon and Maj. Gen. Eyal Zamir. Kochavi was scheduled to appear before the vetting committee on Sunday. Once the general is approved – as he is expected to be – Liberman will bring his candidacy for the position for approval before the government.
HISTORIC OPPORTUNITY FOR SOVEREIGNTY IN JUDEA AND SAMARIA: Dr. Anat Rot in Israel Hayom calls on Israel to annex territories. In areas A and B Palestinians will enjoy self-rule and freedom in domestic issues, while Israeli civil law will be applied to area C. Such a plan will bring calm.
"In the opening speech of the winter session, Prime Minister Netanyahu described the wonderful relationship he has forged with the American administration, the ideological partnership between the two countries, and the historic moves Trump is leading, such as the transfer of the American embassy to Jerusalem and the cessation of funding for UNRWA. Netanyahu is right. We are faced with a rare political window of opportunity, and we must use it to finally disengage from the vision of Oslo and the two-state solution and apply Israeli sovereignty to the territories of Judea and Samaria.
In the past decade, social and political elements, both local and regional, have joined together to lead most of the Israeli people – as well as senior American officials – to the conclusion that the two-state idea is not the 'solution' to the conflict, but rather its fuel. The demand that the Palestinians give up their ethos and agree to a final border, to the end of the conflict and the end of all their claims – is the main cause of violence and terrorism against us. It is a demand they are unable to meet, and they will do anything to avoid doing so.
The architects of Oslo and their partners repeatedly argue that there is a distinction to be made between Fatah and Hamas. The 25 years that have passed since then demonstrate that this is an artificial distinction. The difference between the two is merely tactical: Hamas openly talks about its longing for the destruction of the Zionist state and goes for broke: The return of the Palestinians to their lands and homes in Jaffa and Ramla, Haifa and Safed, and opposition to any territorial compromise. Abu Mazin, on the other hand follows in the footsteps of his mentor, Arafat, and adheres to a phased plan: He is prepared to accept a state within the 1967 borders, but only as a first stage. His goal is identical to that of Hamas; the destruction of the State of Israel. Therefore, he is unwilling to give up the right of return, to agree to the 'end of the conflict and the end of all claims' and to recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. That is also why the Palestinians do not have a state yet. Not because of us, but because of them.
Assuming that left and right are in agreement that it is not recommended to continue the policy of 'sit and do nothing', there are two options on the table: Separation or annexation. Leftist elements, like the Institute for National Security Studies, suggest commencing a unilateral separation from Judea and Samaria, i.e., to grant the Palestinians a state inside our homeland – a front-line bastion for the destruction of Israel – without demanding anything in return.
The right, on the other hand, proposes diverting the train from the bloody Oslo track, and changing direction. Instead of Oslo's 'peace now' stance, which attempts to impose ideas from above and force an 'end to the conflict', it is time to create a reality of shared life from the bottom up that will of itself lead to the end of the conflict, naturally, step by step. On the basis of current reality, two separate living spaces must be established, Israeli and Palestinian, in a manner that will ensure Jewish majority, abolish the military government and normalize life in Samaria and Judea. Areas A and B, in which 98 percent of the Palestinians live, will be granted self-rule and residents will be given full freedom of action in all domestic matters (education, culture, tourism, economy, welfare, etc.). In Area C, Israel will apply Israeli civil law. At the same time, Israel will work to reduce friction points with the Palestinians, increase their freedom of movement, develop their infrastructure and create conditions for economic growth and improved quality of life. All this will be done by a series of steps that will replace walls with bridges.
In contrast to the left-wing programs, which generate constant tension and hyper-vigilance, this program will induce calm. As soon as we stop insisting on determining the basics, neither the Arabs nor the Jews will have to give up their dreams, erase their identity, blur their narrative and resolve 'now' the most charged issues. This is the climate in which it will be possible to lower the level of hostility and fear and bring stability and prosperity to the peoples of the region.
The Americans have already declared that they are open to hearing and learning new ideas. All that is needed is for Netanyahu to seize the day, take advantage of the window of opportunity that has opened, and lead the historic move that the entire right-wing camp is expecting: The reinstatement of Israeli sovereignty to our homeland."
Ends…
'ABDULLAH'S LESSON: Shimon Cohen on Arutz7 argues that King 'Abdullah has made clear to Israel the worth of the piece of paper on which a friendly peace agreement with Israel is signed. What will be the fate of an agreement signed with real enemies?
"Whatever the outcome of the current conflict between King 'Abdullah of Jordan and the Israeli government over the leased land, and whatever the reasons for that emphatic declaration by the King, Israeli politics and statesmanship have been given yet another chance to draw conclusions regarding the value of a peace agreement with our Arab neighbors.
Since the days of Oslo, and even before that, the Israeli right has warned about the validity of the piece of paper hashed out in Norway and signed on the White House lawn. Even if you succeed in signing an agreement with Arafat/'Abbas, there is no one who can vouch for the longevity of this agreement. The right-wing repeatedly warned that at any given moment an internal coup could occur, bringing to power far more violent elements than Arafat/'Abbas. If this were to happen when they have a state that controls the Dan region, Jerusalem and other cities, we will face a real existential threat.
These warnings have been reinforced over the years by a number of factors, most prominently by the PA itself. This was the case when Yasser Arafat himself was unable to restrain himself and in a Johannesburg speech, at the height of the Oslo talks, compared the agreements to Muhammad's agreements with the Quraysh tribe, a Hudaybah agreement that taught generations the Muslim principle according to which it is permissible to sign an agreement which will remain valid only so long as the Muslim is weak. When the Muslim grows stronger, he has the right to violate the agreement and attack his peace partner.
This was also the case with Faisal Husseini, the PA's senior official in charge of Jerusalem, in an interview with the Egyptian newspaper al-Arabi, in which he compared the Oslo Accords to the famous Trojan Horse, thereby clarifying the purpose of those agreements, which was to lure Israel into opening its gates to the armed entry of Palestinians, who would then instigate the revolution from within and defeat Israel in the future.
All these, and other declarations, were supposed to be warning signs staring the Oslo flag-bearers in the face, but as is well known, they did not heed them. They continued on the same path even when Hamas instigated the democratic upheaval and took control of the Gaza Strip. They were not bothered by the right's early warning, because they deem the right to be delusional and crazed; that the day would come when the agreement would be exploited by much more violent terrorist groups, which would direct their missiles from the hills of Samaria and Judea towards Israeli population centers.
It seems to me that one must also view King 'Abdullah's recent declaration in the spirit of that ancient warning: Jordan is a country that is defined by many, even prior to the signing of the peace treaty with it, as a friendly country. 'Abdullah is purportedly an enlightened and progressive king, a product of Western education, the son of a king who looked like a kind and smiling grandfather, who kneeled before the bereaved families from the terrible massacre at Naharayim. This is a king in whose names we were promised, in the wake of his father's death, that he would rule in his father's style and not change a thing in his attitude toward Israel. This is a neighboring country with which we have not had a violent conflict for decades; a kingdom who has enormous economic and political interests in maintaining its agreements with Israel.
The moment the political chains that prevented him from taking action for 25 years were removed from the hands of the King, he immediately hastened to announce the cancellation of what is not the core of the agreement. Anything that might be considered a gesture of goodwill and cooperation no longer interests the King, and the appendix signed by his father and the Israeli prime minister is worth nothing in his eyes. For what is an addendum to a peace agreement and what are economic interests when compared to the deep hatred of the Zionist enemy. This relatively small step taken by the enlightened and Western King to our East should be another warning in a long line of warning signs that have flashed throughout the 25 years of Oslo. One has to be a particularly disturbed dreamer to believe that the Palestinians in spite of their open declarations will act otherwise in an agreement signed with them, if it is ever signed."
Ends…
JORDAN'S COLD SHOULDER AND THE KHASHOGGI MURDER: Ariel Kahana in Israel Hayom claims the common thread between Khashoggi and Jordan is that Arab states' attitude towards Israel has been damaged. MbS's weakening is troubling Jerusalem. Hopefully, Riyadh and Amman understand that if they do not side with Israel – they will be forced to give in to Iran.
"Two completely different events, in completely different countries, by completely different people and in completely different contexts. And yet, even if indirectly, from the Israeli point of view, there is a connection between the murder of the Saudi journalist in Turkey and the withdrawal of Jordan from the appendices to the peace treaty.
Saudi Arabia and Jordan both planned their moves long before they were carried out. The common thread linking the two events is that they undermine the rapprochement between the Arab states and Israel. Many reports in the media and many statements made by the prime minister in recent years, tell of close ties, under the table, between Israel and the 'moderate' Sunni Arab states. This term refers mainly to the Gulf emirates who fear Iran. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, therefore countries of the region are flocking to Israel's side.
One of the main figures supporting this is Saudi Crown-Prince Muhammad bin Salman, Khashoggi's greatest enemy, and whose associates reportedly carried out his barbaric murder. The 32-year-old MbS detests Iran, whose Yemenite proxies have been bombarding the cities of Saudi Arabia with missiles for months. He exhibited a tolerant attitude towards Israel, markedly different from the tone set in Riyadh since the establishment of the state. 'Palestinians and Israelis have a right to a land of their own', he asserted, in what was considered a very moderate utterance in Saudi terms.
MbS was a pivotal player in the new Middle East power map, at the center of which is Israeli/Arab/American resistance to Iranian expansion. Even if not openly or officially, he was the one on whom Trump and Netanyahu relied when they dreamed of and promoted a regional breakthrough bypassing the Palestinians, and against the aggression from Tehran. The extent of the damage to MbS's status in his country and the U.S. is still unclear, but he will obviously be weakened. And when MbS bleeds; his non-conformist policy towards Israel bleeds as well.
MbS's distant cousin, King 'Abdullah of Jordan, did not need the crown-prince's embarrassment to distance himself from Israel. For several years now, the Kingdom of Jordan has been intensifying its practical cooperation with Israel, but increasingly silencing any external exposure of these ties. Jordan buys gas and water from Israel. The security coordination between the two countries is closer than ever. Nevertheless, King 'Abdullah refuses to be photographed with Netanyahu when he meets him. His emissaries at UNESCO and the Security Council do not miss an opportunity to poke fingers in our eyes. De Jure, there is peace between the two countries. De facto, the tensions are rising incessantly.
Whatever his motives, 'Abdullah seized the first opportunity and signaled to his people and to the world that he downgrading peace with Israel. In Israel there was talk this week of a severe blow, disappointment and a clear signal that is part of a clear trend. While the prime minister and defense minister are trying to lower the flames, the Jordanians, it seems, have exhausted the possibilities of increasing them. Netanyahu said he would begin negotiations with Jordan and stressed the importance of relations with it. Lieberman did the same.
In Jordan, even the moderate and supposedly pro-Israeli camp is squeezing the lemon of hostility to the end. 'The position of the Jordanian people and the state of Jordan is clear: Give us our lands and go away,' wrote Marwan Mu'asher, who was the first Jordanian ambassador to Israel and later became the kingdom's foreign minister. This is the feeling in what is supposed to be the Jordanian peace camp.
Dr. Eran Lerman, former deputy head of the National Security Council, concurs that we are at the end of an 'unsuccessful week,' as he puts it, in matters pertaining to the rapprochement between Israel and the Arab states. He views the Jordanian action as legitimate but 'infuriating'. They rely on us for security, receive water above and beyond the agreements, and were able to deal with the Syrian refugee crisis thanks to our security envelope. There is a huge gap between what is happening on the political level and the public's positions.
As for the link between the Khashoggi affair and the Jordanian action, Lerman, a senior researcher at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies, also sees this, although he believes that the main trends will continue. 'The Khashoggi issue is creating tension within the Sunni camp, which is also called the moderate camp of the Arab states. And there are internal contradictions between Jordan and Egypt and Saudi Arabia and the Emirates. But, despite what happened this week, the main parameters have not changed and the fear of Iran, which led to the rapprochement with Israel, still exists. Saudi Arabia is at war, Iranian missiles are falling on Riyadh, and soldiers are being killed in numbers they have not experienced. The fear of Iran did not begin with MbS, and will not disappear if he is ousted. This threat also affects Jordan'.
The smiling photograph depicting King 'Abdullah with MbS at the height of the Khashoggi storm was meant to signal to Saudi Arabia that Jordan, despite the global onslaught, would remain faithful. The reason, which precedes even the fear of Iran, is the shaky Jordanian economy, which depends on Saudi Riyals for subsistence. 'Abdullah can afford a quarrel with tolerant Israel, but not with MbS the killer. Moreover, Iran was and remains the dominant factor in the region, where players align on the chess board in accordance with their fear of her. Therefore, despite this stormy week, in the long run both Saudi Arabia and Jordan will discover that if they do not stand by Israel, they will have to surrender to the ayatollahs in Iran."
Ends…
RETALIATION AGAINST TRUMP: Shlomo Shamir in Maariv explains that the peace plan Macron is expected to present soon is a warning to Trump. He ruined the nuclear accord for the French, now they will proceed to disrupt his peace plan for Israel and the Palestinians.
"French President Macron is not the only one vying to initiate and promote a peace plan, key EU member states also harbor similar ambitions. The president of France is not the only one tired of waiting for the publication of the U.S. peace plan – excuse me, 'deal of the century' – that President Trump has been promising since he entered the White House. In off the record conversations amongst ambassadors and senior diplomats at the UN headquarters in New York, statements have been heard for some time now mocking what is termed 'the infinite amount of time and endless amount of work that the White House is investing in the formulation and wording of the peace plan'.
The report according to which the president of France is threatening to publish an independent peace plan, has been interpreted by diplomats, representatives of Western powers and pundits in New York as a warning to President Trump: 'You spoiled the nuclear agreement with Iran for us. We will disrupt your peace plan for Israel and the Palestinians'. This is no joke. France, Britain and Germany, which were involved in the negotiations that yielded the nuclear agreement with Iran, do not forgive the U.S. for its decision to withdraw from the agreement. Russia and China, who were partners in the 'group of six' that signed the nuclear agreement, are also angry at the U.S. efforts to thwart it.
Diplomatic intrusion into American monopoly in promoting a political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict appears to be a sweet act of revenge against the U.S. The French president cannot be denied his peace plan. But the chances of a French initiative being officially discussed in the UN Security Council are extremely slim. If it is presented for discussion, it will not be approved, due to a guaranteed U.S. veto. Mediation, diplomatic activity and efforts to promote a political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict are reserved exclusively for the U.S. No administration in the past three decades has allowed any power or international party to interfere in the negotiations. President Trump, whose relations with the Western powers are in any case shaky, will be even more adamant than his predecessors in the White House that the U.S. maintain this exclusivity."
Ends…
THE DANGEROUS ILLUSION OF ABSOLUTE SECURITY: Yoram Yuval on Ynet claims that we need to acknowledge that no high-tech defense system can provide absolute security, even if time and time again our politicians lead us to believe otherwise; this is dangerous nonsense that will blow up in our faces.
"IDF Spokesperson Brig. Gen. Ronen Manlis said a simple truth this week. This truth must be said, and everyone who lives in Israel must hear it, and internalize it too. It is the truth that our politicians do not want to tell us about the Iron Dome, David's Sling and the other expensive defense systems: 'The system's defense capability is not hermetic. What saved the day were the correct actions of a citizen,' the IDF spokesman said after a rocket hit a residence in Be'er Sheva.
That is the truth; and we need, and can, live with this truth. Protection, any protection, will never be perfect. The illusion of absolute security, which our politicians pretend to demonstrate to us time and time again, is seductive but also a flawed and dangerous illusion.
This is not the first time that the IDF has been forced to do the dirty and unpopular work for the politicians on behalf of the Israeli public, and will almost certainly not be the last time.
Even the coalition members, who do not say so explicitly, constantly emphasize Israel's wonderful defense capabilities. They lead us to believe that the Israeli home front is on its way to being completely protected, hinting that we will all soon live in safety under a multi-layered defense shield of the Iron Dome, David Sling, the technological barrier around the Gaza Strip and other amazing and expensive defense systems that will protect us from harm.
It is written in the monthly prayer for the sanctification of the new moon: 'Just as I leap (and dance) opposite you and cannot touch you, so may my enemies be unable to touch me for harm.' Our politicians lead us to believe that when crunch time arrives, the Iron Dome will ensure that hundreds of thousands of Hezbollah and Hamas rockets will not harm us. This is not just false, it is utter nonsense; nonsense that will smack us in the face in the next major military confrontation, as it did this week in the apartment of Miri Tamano and her three children in Be'er Sheva.
Anyone who suggests that we can, now or in the future, be totally protected from harm on the home front, thanks to our defensive missile systems – is simply lying to us. About two months ago, Prime Minister Netanyahu presented the 'Security Concept 2030'. Its main aim is to add enormous funds to the air defense and cyber defense systems at the expense of the ground forces; in other words, strengthening the home front defenses, at the cost of eroding IDF's ability to achieve a swift and decisive victory on land. 'Rest assured,' the politicians say, 'we are watching over you. Vote for us, and we will spare no amount of money so that you are completely protected.'
But why? Why do politicians insist on lying to us over and over again by telling us about the wonders of Israel's impenetrable defense technology? Why are they telling us that high-tech missiles will protect us from all evil and thwart any possibility of harming Israel's citizens? The answer is human nature – we very much want to hear it and believe it. Our politicians, clever and efficient at marketing, are always happy to soft-soap us. Who does not want absolute security for themselves and their family? And who is unwilling to pay any price, and vote for any candidate in order to attain this confidence?
There is only one small problem: There is no such thing as absolute security; nor will there ever be. We are always living under some level of danger. Mental health is the ability to live with this knowledge, to live with doubt and in the shadow of danger, and still function normally, and feel at ease. What we need in the home front is not blind faith in the falsehood that we are completely protected, but rather the readiness to act when attacked. The air defense systems will successfully intercept most of the missiles that would hit us, but not all of them. There is no substitute for a well-trained home front that is prepared for any challenge.
This, in fact, is what Miri Tamano, a true Israeli hero, understood this week. As her sister, attorney Ora Tamano, said: 'My sister is a lioness, she slept downstairs and the children slept in three separate rooms upstairs. She simply grabbed them (upon hearing the alarm) and dragged them to the security room. It gave them life. There is nothing left of the house except for that protected room. She is special; a woman of valor. When I myself am at home, there is a dilemma whether to go to the security room or not, because we rely on the Iron Dome. She did the right thing.'
She is 100% correct. We have the means to deal with the missile threat to the Israeli home front. Our air defense systems are indeed a pride-worthy technological achievement, and they are an important element in protecting the home front. But they have cracks, and there will always be cracks. They cannot – and must not – replace vigilance and resourcefulness, readiness for quick response, and use of safety rooms.
The desire for absolute security, and hermetic defense of the home front, is a dangerous illusion. And since our politicians will not tell us this, we should listen to the IDF Spokesperson's Unit. We must be prepared to carry out the instructions of the Home Front Command, which is what Miri Tamano did, and by doing so; she saved her children's lives. This is our true defense, which must be nurtured and practiced, even if it does not add points to politicians in the polls."
Ends…
A LOOMING CRISIS THAT SHOULD BE PREVENTED: Elie Podeh in The Jerusalem Post asserts Israel must not threaten to cut the water supply to Jordan, which was stipulated in the peace agreement.
"Less than 10 months after the resolution of the previous Israeli-Jordanian crisis, a new crisis may be sparked by King 'Abdullah's recent decision not to renew the two annexes to the Israeli-Jordanian peace treaty.
When the treaty was signed in October 1994, Israel and Jordan decided to establish a 'special regime' in two areas, Naharayim (al-Baqoura in Arabic) and Tzofar (al-Ghumar in Arabic), which would remain under Jordan's sovereignty with Israeli private land use rights. The 'special regime' granted unlimited freedom to the landowners, their employees, and their invitees, without applying any customs or immigration legislation. According to the treaty, this arrangement would be in place for 25 years and renewed automatically unless Israel or Jordan gives one year's notice in advance of its termination. In such case, discussions between the parties shall begin.
From a purely domestic Jordanian perspective, this was a timely and astute decision: The king sought to appease the mounting opposition to the peace treaty with Israel in general and the two annexes in particular coming from parliament, political parties, trade unions and civil society at large. Facing growing criticism and periodic waves of demonstrations of citizens protesting against economic and social hardships, the king fired Prime Minister Hani Mulki in June 2018, but to no avail.
Now, in a single stroke, he managed to divert his people's attention from their daily problems. Jordanian print and social media applauded the king's bold decision. In addition, it can be speculated that King 'Abdullah is frustrated by the right-wing Netanyahu government, which demonstrates little interest in promoting a dialogue with the Palestinians, and is pushing for international recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, thus ignoring Jordan's special role in the holy Muslim sites in Jerusalem, as stipulated by the peace treaty. In fact, this very issue has been the cause of a series of diplomatic crises between the two countries in recent years.
Admittedly, the decision is difficult to reconcile with the consistently warm Israel-Jordanian military and intelligence cooperation. Collaboration between the two countries grew even stronger in the wake of the Arab Spring, as Israel helped the kingdom in various ways to stop the infiltration of radical jihadi elements from Syrian and Iraqi territories under the control of ISIS. It seems, therefore, that relations between Israel and Jordan move on two parallel tracks simultaneously: The public and the hidden. Yet, a deterioration in the public domain may also affect the hidden.
Israel was not entirely surprised by the king's decision. If, as all available information suggests, Netanyahu was warned in advance of the coming decision and did nothing to prevent it, then the decision is the result of negligence and miscalculations, and a prime example of how the absence of a foreign minister working in full capacity adversely affects Israel's decision-making. But it is also yet another demonstration of Israel's 'everything will be OK' (yehiye beseder) syndrome.
The question is what can be done now to prevent the situation from deteriorating into another diplomatic crisis. Unfortunately, as Jordan's quiet messages went unheeded by Israel, the king tweeted his decision publicly. That makes it difficult for him to backtrack without a blow to his own pride. In addition, by inflaming public opinion, Jordanian media turned the decision into an issue that involves national honor. Just as the tiny territory of Taba in the Sinai Peninsula became a national issue for Egypt in the 1980s, Naharayim and Tzofar have now became hot issues in Jordan.
How should Israel respond? First, it should be stated what Israel should not do: It should not threaten to cut the water supply to Jordan, which was stipulated in the peace agreement. Water is a highly sensitive issue in Jordan, and Israel has been generous in providing Jordan with more water than stipulated in the agreement, and it should continue doing so. What Israel should do is make an effort to divert any discussions on this issue from the public to the secret track, removing the sting from the heated public debate in the media on both sides. These secret talks should focus on finding a creative solution based on the peace treaty and the two countries' shared experience.
Article 7b of the treaty allows the parties to 'enter negotiations with a view to concluding agreements on economic cooperation, including trade and the establishment of a free trade area or areas.' A talk with several Israeli experts on the issue emphatically confirmed that a creative solution can be found which will be satisfactory to both sides.
June 2017, after an Israeli security guard killed two Jordanians after being attacked, it took the Israeli government six months to resolve the crisis with Jordan. It was an unnecessarily long period. Today, Israel should act immediately to contain the looming crisis and propose a reasonable solution to the problem.
The main lesson from this episode is that Israel needs to pay greater attention to diplomacy. But as long as Israel's foreign policy is subservient to national security considerations, the government will continue to suffer from periodic diplomatic blunders."
Ends…