5 june 2015
The comment was the latest sign that Obama has concluded that the US must rethink its stance on the Mideast peace process if it is to maintain credibility in the world
President Obama took a step toward a tougher line with Israel in an interview released Tuesday, raising the possibility that the US will allow a United Nations vote on issues related to the Palestinians if the two sides make no meaningful movement toward peace.
In an interview with Israel's Channel 2, Obama noted that his administration has "up until this point" quashed such efforts at the UN while insisting that the Israelis and Palestinians must negotiate a resolution. But he said it is a challenge for the US to keep demanding that the Palestinians negotiate in good faith if no one believes the Israelis are doing the same.
"How do we move off what appears right now to be a hopeless situation and move it back towards a hopeful situation?" Obama asked in the interview. "That will require more than just words. That will require some actions. And that's going to be hard work, though, because right now I think there's not a lot of confidence in the process."
The comment was the latest sign that Obama has concluded that the US must rethink its stance on the Mideast peace process if it is to maintain credibility in the world.
His thinking on the matter was clearly spurred this spring by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's stand against Palestinian statehood during his election campaign. Even though Netanyahu has since publicly reversed his position, Obama said in the interview that Israel "as a whole loses credibility" on the point.
"If, in fact, there's no prospect of an actual peace process, if nobody believes there's a peace process, then it becomes more difficult to argue with those who are concerned about settlement construction, those who are concerned about the current situation," Obama said. "It's more difficult for me to say to them, 'Be patient and wait because we have a process here' -- because all they need to do is to point to the statements that have been made saying there is no process."
Obama's critical tone toward Netanyahu, describing him as someone who is "predisposed" to "think perhaps that peace is naive," appeared to return to the tough language that marked administration statements earlier this spring, around the time of the Israeli election. More recently, the White House had seemed to be trying to mend fences.
The apparent shift in tone seems "hard to understand," said a Democratic strategist with close ties to the White House. Previous White House criticisms of the prime minister clearly strengthened Netanyahu electorally, he said, speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid alienating White House officials. "These kind of attacks don't really hurt him. They help him."
Obama's veiled threat about Palestinian statehood lands hard at a time when the U.S. and other world powers are in high-stakes negotiations with Iranian officials to limit their country's nuclear program. Israel deeply opposes the deal on the grounds that it will bolster Iran's nuclear efforts and its economy and boost its aggression in the Middle East; some of Iran's leaders have said Israel does not have the right to exist.
The deadline for a deal, a major foreign-policy priority for Obama, is at the end of the month, and the president is already gearing up for the difficult sales job ahead of him if an agreement is reached. Congress has demanded a chance to review the deal, a point Obama has ceded, but the deep opposition from Israel could complicate his attempts to gain approval from US lawmakers who ardently support Israel.
In advance of that prospect, Obama recently visited a prominent Washington synagogue to talk about his deep love of Israel. Close advisors and friends have tried to underscore the point, with former senior advisor David Axelrod telling Israeli Channel 2 that Obama feels a deep personal affinity for the Jewish people.
And in an interview with the Atlantic magazine last week, Obama also talked about his personal commitment to the security of Israel, and idea he mirrored in the new interview with Channel 2's Ilana Dayan.
Obama told Dayan that the US assistance to Israel on security, intelligence and military matters "doesn't go away" because it is part of a "solemn commitment that I've made with respect to Israel's security."
But there may be a "practical consequence" if there are new resolutions introduced in the UN, he said.
The peace process could become a bigger problem for Obama in his complicated ties with Israel, but analysts say he has been trying to simplify that relationship lately by explaining himself directly to the Israeli public.
As he prepares to talk about a possible resolution with Iran over its nuclear deal, said one, Obama's primary message is about his intent.
"He has to persuade the Israeli audience that he is preoccupied with the security of Israel," said Jon Alterman, head of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "Did wearing a kippa and speaking in a prominent synagogue do the trick? It certainly reinforced a sense of affinity and reassured some people of the nature of his ties to Israel."
As he spoke with Dayan, Obama drew his own parallels between the African American experience and the Jewish one.
"In my mind, there is a direct line between the Jewish experience, the African American experience, and as a consequence, we have, I hope, a special empathy and a special regard for those who are being mistreated because of the colour of their skin or the nature of their faith," Obama said.
View the original piece as published by the LA Times.
President Obama took a step toward a tougher line with Israel in an interview released Tuesday, raising the possibility that the US will allow a United Nations vote on issues related to the Palestinians if the two sides make no meaningful movement toward peace.
In an interview with Israel's Channel 2, Obama noted that his administration has "up until this point" quashed such efforts at the UN while insisting that the Israelis and Palestinians must negotiate a resolution. But he said it is a challenge for the US to keep demanding that the Palestinians negotiate in good faith if no one believes the Israelis are doing the same.
"How do we move off what appears right now to be a hopeless situation and move it back towards a hopeful situation?" Obama asked in the interview. "That will require more than just words. That will require some actions. And that's going to be hard work, though, because right now I think there's not a lot of confidence in the process."
The comment was the latest sign that Obama has concluded that the US must rethink its stance on the Mideast peace process if it is to maintain credibility in the world.
His thinking on the matter was clearly spurred this spring by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's stand against Palestinian statehood during his election campaign. Even though Netanyahu has since publicly reversed his position, Obama said in the interview that Israel "as a whole loses credibility" on the point.
"If, in fact, there's no prospect of an actual peace process, if nobody believes there's a peace process, then it becomes more difficult to argue with those who are concerned about settlement construction, those who are concerned about the current situation," Obama said. "It's more difficult for me to say to them, 'Be patient and wait because we have a process here' -- because all they need to do is to point to the statements that have been made saying there is no process."
Obama's critical tone toward Netanyahu, describing him as someone who is "predisposed" to "think perhaps that peace is naive," appeared to return to the tough language that marked administration statements earlier this spring, around the time of the Israeli election. More recently, the White House had seemed to be trying to mend fences.
The apparent shift in tone seems "hard to understand," said a Democratic strategist with close ties to the White House. Previous White House criticisms of the prime minister clearly strengthened Netanyahu electorally, he said, speaking on condition of anonymity to avoid alienating White House officials. "These kind of attacks don't really hurt him. They help him."
Obama's veiled threat about Palestinian statehood lands hard at a time when the U.S. and other world powers are in high-stakes negotiations with Iranian officials to limit their country's nuclear program. Israel deeply opposes the deal on the grounds that it will bolster Iran's nuclear efforts and its economy and boost its aggression in the Middle East; some of Iran's leaders have said Israel does not have the right to exist.
The deadline for a deal, a major foreign-policy priority for Obama, is at the end of the month, and the president is already gearing up for the difficult sales job ahead of him if an agreement is reached. Congress has demanded a chance to review the deal, a point Obama has ceded, but the deep opposition from Israel could complicate his attempts to gain approval from US lawmakers who ardently support Israel.
In advance of that prospect, Obama recently visited a prominent Washington synagogue to talk about his deep love of Israel. Close advisors and friends have tried to underscore the point, with former senior advisor David Axelrod telling Israeli Channel 2 that Obama feels a deep personal affinity for the Jewish people.
And in an interview with the Atlantic magazine last week, Obama also talked about his personal commitment to the security of Israel, and idea he mirrored in the new interview with Channel 2's Ilana Dayan.
Obama told Dayan that the US assistance to Israel on security, intelligence and military matters "doesn't go away" because it is part of a "solemn commitment that I've made with respect to Israel's security."
But there may be a "practical consequence" if there are new resolutions introduced in the UN, he said.
The peace process could become a bigger problem for Obama in his complicated ties with Israel, but analysts say he has been trying to simplify that relationship lately by explaining himself directly to the Israeli public.
As he prepares to talk about a possible resolution with Iran over its nuclear deal, said one, Obama's primary message is about his intent.
"He has to persuade the Israeli audience that he is preoccupied with the security of Israel," said Jon Alterman, head of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "Did wearing a kippa and speaking in a prominent synagogue do the trick? It certainly reinforced a sense of affinity and reassured some people of the nature of his ties to Israel."
As he spoke with Dayan, Obama drew his own parallels between the African American experience and the Jewish one.
"In my mind, there is a direct line between the Jewish experience, the African American experience, and as a consequence, we have, I hope, a special empathy and a special regard for those who are being mistreated because of the colour of their skin or the nature of their faith," Obama said.
View the original piece as published by the LA Times.
23 may 2015
US blocks global document aimed at ridding world of nuclear weapons, saying Egypt and other states tried to 'cynically manipulate' the process by setting deadline for Israel and its neighbors to meet within months.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thanked US Secretary of State John Kerry for blocking an Egyptian-led drive on a possible Middle East nuclear arms ban at a United Nations conference, an Israeli official said on Saturday.
It was a rare message of thanks from Netanyahu, who has repeatedly accused President Barack Obama of undermining Israel's security by attempting to reach a nuclear deal with Iran.
The United States on Friday blocked a global document aimed at ridding the world of nuclear weapons, saying Egypt and other states tried to "cynically manipulate" the process by setting a deadline for Israel and its neighbors to meet within months on a Middle East zone free of such weapons.
The now-failed final document of a landmark treaty review conference had called on the UN secretary-general to convene the Middle East conference no later than March 2016, regardless of whether Israel and its neighbors agree on an agenda.
Israel is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has never publicly declared what is widely considered to be an extensive nuclear weapons program. A conference might force Israel to acknowledge it. Netanyahu spoke with Kerry "to convey his appreciation to President Obama and to the Secretary," a senior Israeli official said on condition of anonymity.
"The United States kept its commitment to Israel by preventing a Middle East resolution that would single out Israel and ignore its security interests and the threats posed to it by an increasingly turbulent Middle East," the official added. Israel also thanked Britain and Canada for joining the United States in blocking consensus at the conference, the official said.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon voiced disappointment that NPT parties were "unable to narrow their differences on the future of nuclear disarmament or to arrive at a new collective vision on how to achieve a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and all other weapons of mass destruction (WMD)."
Since adopting a final document requires consensus, the rejection by the United States, backed by Britain and Canada, means the entire blueprint for global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation for the next five years has been blocked after four weeks of negotiations. The next treaty review conference is in 2020. That has alarmed countries without nuclear weapons, who are increasingly frustrated by what they see as the slow pace of nuclear-armed countries to disarm.
The United States and Russia hold more than 90 percent of the estimated 16,000 nuclear weapons in the world today. Amid a growing movement that stresses the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons, Austria announced that 107 states have now signed a pledge calling for legal measures to ban and eliminate them.
The US comments Friday came after a top State Department official was dispatched to Israel this week for intense talks, as Israel protested the idea of being forced into a conference with its Arab neighbors without prior agreement on an agenda. Israel had been furious when the US at the treaty review conference five years ago signed off on a document that called for talks on a Middle East nuclear-free zone by 2012. Those talks never took place.
The language on the final document rejected Friday was "incompatible with our long-standing policies," said Rose Gottemoeller, the US under secretary of state for arms control and international security. She named Egypt as being one of the countries "not willing to let go of these unrealistic and unworkable conditions."
Egypt later said it was extremely disappointed and warned, "This will have consequences in front of the Arab world and public opinion."
Iran, speaking for a group of more than 100 mostly developing countries, said it was surprised to see the US, Britain and Canada willing to block the entire document in defense of a country that it said has endangered the region by not agreeing to safeguards for its nuclear program. Israel has been a fierce critic of the current efforts of world powers to negotiate an agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, which Iran says is for peaceful purposes only.
Gottemoeller also pointed out that the 2010 mandate to hold a conference on a Middle East nuclear-free zone has now effectively expired. The head of the Russian delegation, Mikhail Ulyanov, noted the setback, saying it was "a shame that an opportunity for dialogue has to be missed, perhaps for a long time to come."
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu thanked US Secretary of State John Kerry for blocking an Egyptian-led drive on a possible Middle East nuclear arms ban at a United Nations conference, an Israeli official said on Saturday.
It was a rare message of thanks from Netanyahu, who has repeatedly accused President Barack Obama of undermining Israel's security by attempting to reach a nuclear deal with Iran.
The United States on Friday blocked a global document aimed at ridding the world of nuclear weapons, saying Egypt and other states tried to "cynically manipulate" the process by setting a deadline for Israel and its neighbors to meet within months on a Middle East zone free of such weapons.
The now-failed final document of a landmark treaty review conference had called on the UN secretary-general to convene the Middle East conference no later than March 2016, regardless of whether Israel and its neighbors agree on an agenda.
Israel is not a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has never publicly declared what is widely considered to be an extensive nuclear weapons program. A conference might force Israel to acknowledge it. Netanyahu spoke with Kerry "to convey his appreciation to President Obama and to the Secretary," a senior Israeli official said on condition of anonymity.
"The United States kept its commitment to Israel by preventing a Middle East resolution that would single out Israel and ignore its security interests and the threats posed to it by an increasingly turbulent Middle East," the official added. Israel also thanked Britain and Canada for joining the United States in blocking consensus at the conference, the official said.
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon voiced disappointment that NPT parties were "unable to narrow their differences on the future of nuclear disarmament or to arrive at a new collective vision on how to achieve a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and all other weapons of mass destruction (WMD)."
Since adopting a final document requires consensus, the rejection by the United States, backed by Britain and Canada, means the entire blueprint for global nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation for the next five years has been blocked after four weeks of negotiations. The next treaty review conference is in 2020. That has alarmed countries without nuclear weapons, who are increasingly frustrated by what they see as the slow pace of nuclear-armed countries to disarm.
The United States and Russia hold more than 90 percent of the estimated 16,000 nuclear weapons in the world today. Amid a growing movement that stresses the humanitarian impact of nuclear weapons, Austria announced that 107 states have now signed a pledge calling for legal measures to ban and eliminate them.
The US comments Friday came after a top State Department official was dispatched to Israel this week for intense talks, as Israel protested the idea of being forced into a conference with its Arab neighbors without prior agreement on an agenda. Israel had been furious when the US at the treaty review conference five years ago signed off on a document that called for talks on a Middle East nuclear-free zone by 2012. Those talks never took place.
The language on the final document rejected Friday was "incompatible with our long-standing policies," said Rose Gottemoeller, the US under secretary of state for arms control and international security. She named Egypt as being one of the countries "not willing to let go of these unrealistic and unworkable conditions."
Egypt later said it was extremely disappointed and warned, "This will have consequences in front of the Arab world and public opinion."
Iran, speaking for a group of more than 100 mostly developing countries, said it was surprised to see the US, Britain and Canada willing to block the entire document in defense of a country that it said has endangered the region by not agreeing to safeguards for its nuclear program. Israel has been a fierce critic of the current efforts of world powers to negotiate an agreement with Iran over its nuclear program, which Iran says is for peaceful purposes only.
Gottemoeller also pointed out that the 2010 mandate to hold a conference on a Middle East nuclear-free zone has now effectively expired. The head of the Russian delegation, Mikhail Ulyanov, noted the setback, saying it was "a shame that an opportunity for dialogue has to be missed, perhaps for a long time to come."
22 may 2015
President says because U.S. is close to Israel, Oval Office had to speak up about Israeli PM's Election Day comments lest it lose credibility.[Haaretz]
U.S. President Barack Obama said in an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's anti-Arab remarks on Election Day has "foreign-policy consequences," The Atlantic reported on Thursday.
The U.S. president made it clear during the interview with the American periodical on Tuesday that Netanyahu's portrayal of Arab voters as "an invading force that might vote" is contrary to the very language of the Israeli Declaration of Independence, which explicitly states that all people regardless of race or religion are full participants in the democracy."
"When something like that happens, that has foreign policy consequences, and precisely because we’re so close to Israel, for us to simply stand there and say nothing would have meant that this office, the Oval Office, lost credibility when it came to speaking out on these issues,” he said.
Obama remarked in the interview that despite the confrontations with Netanyahu over the past number of years, most of the American Jewish community still voted for him in the 2012 presidential election.
"What I also think is that there has been a very concerted effort on the part of some political forces to equate being pro-Israel, and hence being supportive of the Jewish people, with a rubber stamp on a particular set of policies coming out of the Israeli government," he said. "So if you are questioning settlement policy, that indicates you’re anti-Israeli, or that indicates you’re anti-Jewish.
If you express compassion or empathy towards Palestinian youth, who are dealing with checkpoints or restrictions on their ability to travel, then you are suspect in terms of your support of Israel. If you are willing to get into public disagreements with the Israeli government, then the notion is that you are being anti-Israel, and by extension, anti-Jewish. I completely reject that."
During the Atlantic interview, Obama expressed deep concern with the direction Israel has been heading, especially in everything regarding its democratic values. Obama remarked that "precisely because" he cares so much about Israel and the Jewish people, "I feel obliged to speak honestly and truthfully about what I think will be most likely to lead to long-term security, and will best position us to continue to combat anti-Semitism, and I make no apologies for that precisely because I am secure and confident about how deeply I care about Israel and the Jewish people."
Obama stressed that he sees as a moral obligation the defense of Israel and standing up for its right to exist, especially because of the lessons of the 20th century.
"And so, to me, being pro-Israel and pro-Jewish is part and parcel with the values that I've been fighting for since I was politically conscious and started getting involved in politics," Obama said to the Atlantic. "There’s a direct line between supporting the right of the Jewish people to have a homeland and to feel safe and free of discrimination and persecution, and the right of African Americans to vote and have equal protection under the law. These things are indivisible in my mind."
On the other hand, he said that it is also true that by extension he has "to show that same kind of regard to other peoples. And I think it is true to Israel’s traditions and its values—its founding principles—that it has to care about those Palestinian kids."
He recalled that when he spoke in Jerusalem, "the biggest applause that I got was when I spoke about those kids I had visited in Ramallah, and I said to an Israeli audience that it is profoundly Jewish, it is profoundly consistent with Israel’s traditions to care about them. And they agreed."
"So if that’s not translated into policy—if we’re not willing to take risks on behalf of those values—then those principles become empty words, and in fact, in my mind, it makes it more difficult for us to continue to promote those values when it comes to protecting Israel internationally," he told the Atlantic.
The American president added that when he defends Israel on the international stage, especially against anti-Semitism and anti-Israel policies that are based on hostility rather than "the particulars of the Palestinian cause" he needs credibility.
Therefore, he is required to "honest with friends about how I view these issues," he remarked. "Now that makes, understandably, folks both in Israel and here in the United States uncomfortable," he noted.
"But the one argument that I very much have been concerned about, and it has gotten stronger over the last 10 years ... it’s less overt than the arguments that a Sheldon Adelson makes, but in some ways can be just as pernicious, is this argument that there should not be disagreements in public," the president added.
Obama noted that he is criticized for criticizing Israel, even though farm more contentious arguments are made in the cafes of Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. He stressed, though, that the most important thing the U.S. can do to strengthen Israel's position is to tell the prime minister that achieving peace requires some risks.
"And the question you have to ask yourself then is: How do you weigh those risks against the risks of doing nothing and just perpetuating the status quo?" Obama said. "My argument is that the risks of doing nothing are far greater," he said. Ultimately, it is important for the Israeli people and the Israeli government to make its own decisions about what it needs to secure the people of that nation," he conceded.
“My hope is that over time [the] debate gets back on a path where there’s some semblance of hope and not simply fear, because it feels to me as if, if all we are talking about is based from fear,” Obama said. “Over the short term that may seem wise—cynicism always seems a little wise—but it may lead Israel down a path in which it’s very hard to protect itself [as] a Jewish-majority democracy."
Obama told the Atlantic that he grew up on the Israel of kibbutzim, Moshe Dayan and Golda Meir, "and the sense that not only are we creating a safe Jewish homeland, but also we are remaking the world."
He recalled that these values shaped him as a politician. He said he told a group of Jewish leaders he has high expectations for Israel, which he considers neither unrealistic nor stupid.
"I want Israel, in the same way that I want the United States, to embody the Judeo-Christian and, ultimately then, what I believe are human or universal values that have led to progress over a millennium," he stressed. "The same values that led to the end of Jim Crow and slavery. The same values that led to Nelson Mandela being freed and a multiracial democracy emerging in South Africa….the same values that lead us to speak out against anti-Semitism. I want Israel to embody these values because Israel is aligned with us in that fight for what I believe to be true. And that doesn’t mean there aren’t tough choices and there aren’t compromises. It doesn’t mean that we don’t have to ask ourselves very tough questions about, in the short term, do we have to protect ourselves."
Obama remarked that despite his criticism of Netanyahu and his government's policy, he has constantly worked since entering the White House to ramp up military, security and intelligence aide to Israel. He said even his biggest critics in Israel admit as much. He noted that during the last American push for an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal, he sent top American army officials to Israel to determine its security needs for a two-state era.
"So this isn’t an issue of being naive or unrealistic, but ultimately yes, I think there are certain values that the United States, at its best, exemplifies. I think there are certain values that Israel, and the Jewish tradition, at its best exemplifies," he said. "And I am willing to fight for those values."
According to Obama, he needs to be able to tell Israel he doesn't agree with a particular policy like the settlements, checkpoints and the Jewish nationality law. He said this is "entirely consistent with being supportive of the State of Israel and the Jewish people."
He added: "Now for someone in Israel, including the prime minister, to disagree with those policy positions—that’s OK too. And we can have a debate, and we can have an argument. But you can’t equate people of good will who are concerned about those issues with somebody who is hostile towards Israel."
U.S. President Barack Obama said in an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's anti-Arab remarks on Election Day has "foreign-policy consequences," The Atlantic reported on Thursday.
The U.S. president made it clear during the interview with the American periodical on Tuesday that Netanyahu's portrayal of Arab voters as "an invading force that might vote" is contrary to the very language of the Israeli Declaration of Independence, which explicitly states that all people regardless of race or religion are full participants in the democracy."
"When something like that happens, that has foreign policy consequences, and precisely because we’re so close to Israel, for us to simply stand there and say nothing would have meant that this office, the Oval Office, lost credibility when it came to speaking out on these issues,” he said.
Obama remarked in the interview that despite the confrontations with Netanyahu over the past number of years, most of the American Jewish community still voted for him in the 2012 presidential election.
"What I also think is that there has been a very concerted effort on the part of some political forces to equate being pro-Israel, and hence being supportive of the Jewish people, with a rubber stamp on a particular set of policies coming out of the Israeli government," he said. "So if you are questioning settlement policy, that indicates you’re anti-Israeli, or that indicates you’re anti-Jewish.
If you express compassion or empathy towards Palestinian youth, who are dealing with checkpoints or restrictions on their ability to travel, then you are suspect in terms of your support of Israel. If you are willing to get into public disagreements with the Israeli government, then the notion is that you are being anti-Israel, and by extension, anti-Jewish. I completely reject that."
During the Atlantic interview, Obama expressed deep concern with the direction Israel has been heading, especially in everything regarding its democratic values. Obama remarked that "precisely because" he cares so much about Israel and the Jewish people, "I feel obliged to speak honestly and truthfully about what I think will be most likely to lead to long-term security, and will best position us to continue to combat anti-Semitism, and I make no apologies for that precisely because I am secure and confident about how deeply I care about Israel and the Jewish people."
Obama stressed that he sees as a moral obligation the defense of Israel and standing up for its right to exist, especially because of the lessons of the 20th century.
"And so, to me, being pro-Israel and pro-Jewish is part and parcel with the values that I've been fighting for since I was politically conscious and started getting involved in politics," Obama said to the Atlantic. "There’s a direct line between supporting the right of the Jewish people to have a homeland and to feel safe and free of discrimination and persecution, and the right of African Americans to vote and have equal protection under the law. These things are indivisible in my mind."
On the other hand, he said that it is also true that by extension he has "to show that same kind of regard to other peoples. And I think it is true to Israel’s traditions and its values—its founding principles—that it has to care about those Palestinian kids."
He recalled that when he spoke in Jerusalem, "the biggest applause that I got was when I spoke about those kids I had visited in Ramallah, and I said to an Israeli audience that it is profoundly Jewish, it is profoundly consistent with Israel’s traditions to care about them. And they agreed."
"So if that’s not translated into policy—if we’re not willing to take risks on behalf of those values—then those principles become empty words, and in fact, in my mind, it makes it more difficult for us to continue to promote those values when it comes to protecting Israel internationally," he told the Atlantic.
The American president added that when he defends Israel on the international stage, especially against anti-Semitism and anti-Israel policies that are based on hostility rather than "the particulars of the Palestinian cause" he needs credibility.
Therefore, he is required to "honest with friends about how I view these issues," he remarked. "Now that makes, understandably, folks both in Israel and here in the United States uncomfortable," he noted.
"But the one argument that I very much have been concerned about, and it has gotten stronger over the last 10 years ... it’s less overt than the arguments that a Sheldon Adelson makes, but in some ways can be just as pernicious, is this argument that there should not be disagreements in public," the president added.
Obama noted that he is criticized for criticizing Israel, even though farm more contentious arguments are made in the cafes of Tel Aviv or Jerusalem. He stressed, though, that the most important thing the U.S. can do to strengthen Israel's position is to tell the prime minister that achieving peace requires some risks.
"And the question you have to ask yourself then is: How do you weigh those risks against the risks of doing nothing and just perpetuating the status quo?" Obama said. "My argument is that the risks of doing nothing are far greater," he said. Ultimately, it is important for the Israeli people and the Israeli government to make its own decisions about what it needs to secure the people of that nation," he conceded.
“My hope is that over time [the] debate gets back on a path where there’s some semblance of hope and not simply fear, because it feels to me as if, if all we are talking about is based from fear,” Obama said. “Over the short term that may seem wise—cynicism always seems a little wise—but it may lead Israel down a path in which it’s very hard to protect itself [as] a Jewish-majority democracy."
Obama told the Atlantic that he grew up on the Israel of kibbutzim, Moshe Dayan and Golda Meir, "and the sense that not only are we creating a safe Jewish homeland, but also we are remaking the world."
He recalled that these values shaped him as a politician. He said he told a group of Jewish leaders he has high expectations for Israel, which he considers neither unrealistic nor stupid.
"I want Israel, in the same way that I want the United States, to embody the Judeo-Christian and, ultimately then, what I believe are human or universal values that have led to progress over a millennium," he stressed. "The same values that led to the end of Jim Crow and slavery. The same values that led to Nelson Mandela being freed and a multiracial democracy emerging in South Africa….the same values that lead us to speak out against anti-Semitism. I want Israel to embody these values because Israel is aligned with us in that fight for what I believe to be true. And that doesn’t mean there aren’t tough choices and there aren’t compromises. It doesn’t mean that we don’t have to ask ourselves very tough questions about, in the short term, do we have to protect ourselves."
Obama remarked that despite his criticism of Netanyahu and his government's policy, he has constantly worked since entering the White House to ramp up military, security and intelligence aide to Israel. He said even his biggest critics in Israel admit as much. He noted that during the last American push for an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal, he sent top American army officials to Israel to determine its security needs for a two-state era.
"So this isn’t an issue of being naive or unrealistic, but ultimately yes, I think there are certain values that the United States, at its best, exemplifies. I think there are certain values that Israel, and the Jewish tradition, at its best exemplifies," he said. "And I am willing to fight for those values."
According to Obama, he needs to be able to tell Israel he doesn't agree with a particular policy like the settlements, checkpoints and the Jewish nationality law. He said this is "entirely consistent with being supportive of the State of Israel and the Jewish people."
He added: "Now for someone in Israel, including the prime minister, to disagree with those policy positions—that’s OK too. And we can have a debate, and we can have an argument. But you can’t equate people of good will who are concerned about those issues with somebody who is hostile towards Israel."
13 may 2015
In an interview with Arab media, US president stressed need for two-state solution despite difficulties in reaching an agreement; 'I will never give up hope'.
US President Barack Obama gave an interview on Tuesday with Asharq al-Awsat, an Arabic international newspaper based in London.
"I will never give up on the hope for peace between Israelis and Palestinians," said Obama, "Palestinians deserve an end to the occupation and the daily indignities that come with it. That's why we've worked so hard over the years for a two-state solution and to develop innovative ways to address Israel's security and Palestinian sovereignty needs."
Obama's comments came prior to a meeting of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) in which he is due to sit with key leaders of six Arab nations from the Middle East. While his hope remains, Obama said, "It's no secret that we now have a very difficult path forward. As a result, the United States is taking a hard look at our approach to the conflict," suggesting that the EU is not alone in considering policy adjustments with Israel.
"Addressing the lasting impact in Gaza of last summer's conflict should also be central to any effort," concluded Obama. "Ultimately, the parties will need to address not just Gaza's immediate humanitarian and reconstruction needs, but also core challenges to Gaza's future within a two-state context, including reinvigorating Gaza's connection with the West Bank and reestablishing strong commercial links with Israel and the global economy."
US President Barack Obama gave an interview on Tuesday with Asharq al-Awsat, an Arabic international newspaper based in London.
"I will never give up on the hope for peace between Israelis and Palestinians," said Obama, "Palestinians deserve an end to the occupation and the daily indignities that come with it. That's why we've worked so hard over the years for a two-state solution and to develop innovative ways to address Israel's security and Palestinian sovereignty needs."
Obama's comments came prior to a meeting of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) in which he is due to sit with key leaders of six Arab nations from the Middle East. While his hope remains, Obama said, "It's no secret that we now have a very difficult path forward. As a result, the United States is taking a hard look at our approach to the conflict," suggesting that the EU is not alone in considering policy adjustments with Israel.
"Addressing the lasting impact in Gaza of last summer's conflict should also be central to any effort," concluded Obama. "Ultimately, the parties will need to address not just Gaza's immediate humanitarian and reconstruction needs, but also core challenges to Gaza's future within a two-state context, including reinvigorating Gaza's connection with the West Bank and reestablishing strong commercial links with Israel and the global economy."
7 may 2015
For the Wisconsin governor’s first-ever trip to the Holy Land, he went to Larry Mizel, the go-to billionaire for GOP politicians traveling to Israel.
When Republican politicians want to make their first pilgrimage to the Holy Land, there’s but one person to call: Larry Mizel. That’s why he’s arranging Scott Walker’s first-ever trip to Israel next week.
The billionaire homebuilder and Republican Jewish Coalition board member isn’t in the same league of political kingmakers as casino magnate Sheldon Adelson: He’s given only $600,000 in political contributions since 1998 compared to the $100 million Adelson spent in 2012.
But Mizel has become the minder of choice for GOP governors, senators and presidential aspirants traveling to Israel. He opens doors, arranges meetings with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other members of Israel’s ruling class, and provides the kind of guidance that helps his party’s candidates avoid the gaffes that can befall politicians abroad.
“He has become a go-to person for Republicans looking to understand Israel and demonstrate their support for it,” said Ken Toltz, a longtime activist with The American Israel Public Affairs Committee who has worked closely with Mizel for decades. “For Larry, it’s about building relationships and giving elected officials or aspiring elected officials that powerful on-the-ground experience that connects them to Israel and to him,” Toltz said.
Mizel hasn’t committed to support the Wisconsin governor, he’s just opening doors for him on the five-day trip as Walker seeks to demonstrate more command of foreign policy issues and national security, the top issue for GOP primary voters according to a recent poll.
“He definitely likes him,” said one Colorado Republican close to Mizel. “But he won’t commit. He will build a relationship and friendship with all of them, but that doesn’t mean he’ll throw his resources behind any of them. That’s just how Larry is.”
Walker has been boning up on foreign policy after making several awkward statements that raised concerns about his fitness to lead at a time marked by global conflict. His gaffes — including a comment that “the most significant foreign policy decision” of his lifetime was when Ronald Reagan fired air traffic controllers, and another suggesting that his experience battling Wisconsin’s teachers unions had prepared him to take on the Islamic State group — have made Walker eager to demonstrate more command of foreign policy and national security, the top issue for primary voters according to a recent poll.
“Within our primary, foreign policy is pre-eminent and that’s probably not something a lot of our candidates planned on,” said John Weaver, a GOP consultant who has advised a number of presidential campaigns. “There are a number of tests you have to pass and this is a big one.”
Ben Carson, who launched his bid for the White House this week, learned the pitfalls of falling short on that test earlier this year. His own “fact-finding mission” to Israel seemed to do more harm than good after a magazine profile depicted him asking staffers incredibly mundane questions about Israel’s legislative body, the Knesset, which he seemed to know nothing about.
Walker, who currently leads many polls of the still unsettled Republican primary field, has yet to officially launch his campaign for the White House. AshLee Strong, a spokeswoman for Walker’s Our American Revival PAC, continues to describe the governor’s RJC-sponsored trip as a “listening tour” but offered few details.
Walker’s new foreign policy adviser, Mike Gallagher, an Iraq War veteran and former Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffer, will be accompanying him as he tours Israel.
“He’s got to build up his foreign policy experience and be able to talk about U.S.-Israel relations because it’s going to come up in the primary,” said Elliott Abrams of the Council on Foreign Relations, who plans to meet with Walker while he’s in Tel Aviv to give a previously scheduled speech.
Walker is wary of being outflanked on Israel issues by other hawkish primary rivals. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, appears to have an inside track for the backing of Paul Singer, a hedge fund billionaire and RJC member from New York — and possibly with Adelson himself. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, another foreign policy hawk likely to enter the presidential race, has also carved out a lane on national security and defense matters.
Rubio visited Israel two years ago, and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie took a similar trip in 2012. Graham touts his on-the-ground experience, not just in Israel but in the broader Middle East, especially visiting battle zones where the U.S. has been engaged.
“I’ve been to Afghanistan 23 times now,” Graham repeatedly told supporters last weekend in South Carolina.
With Jeb Bush and others raising unprecedented sums of money through super PACs that could push the primary fight well into April 2016, Walker is hoping that Jewish Republican donors who are skeptical about Bush can help him keep up.
“Hopefully, foreign policy discussions are not driven by a need to capture fundraising dollars,” Weaver said. “I’m skeptical about that, but hopefully that’s not the case.”
Scott McConnell, co-founder of The American Conservative magazine, was even more blunt.
“He’s doing it because the way the Republican primary is set up, this is the only foreign policy issue that seems to exist,” McConnell said. “The Adelson primary seems to be the only issue that matters.”
Yet support for Israel is also a threshold issue for many in the Republican base.
“This is a strong grass-roots view now,” Abrams said. “You go talk to people in Arkansas and places where there’s not much of a Jewish population and there’s tremendous support for Israel.”
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, a Democrat who is close to Mizel and a number of GOP donors, went on a Mizel-led tour of Israel in 2013 and called it “the most remarkable seven-day trip of my life.”
That trip, as recounted by Hickenlooper, included trips to sites like Jerusalem’s Wailing Wall, the Golan Heights, Yad Vashem and Masada, and featured camel rides, meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a three-hour dinner with former Prime Minister Ehud Barak.
When Republican politicians want to make their first pilgrimage to the Holy Land, there’s but one person to call: Larry Mizel. That’s why he’s arranging Scott Walker’s first-ever trip to Israel next week.
The billionaire homebuilder and Republican Jewish Coalition board member isn’t in the same league of political kingmakers as casino magnate Sheldon Adelson: He’s given only $600,000 in political contributions since 1998 compared to the $100 million Adelson spent in 2012.
But Mizel has become the minder of choice for GOP governors, senators and presidential aspirants traveling to Israel. He opens doors, arranges meetings with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other members of Israel’s ruling class, and provides the kind of guidance that helps his party’s candidates avoid the gaffes that can befall politicians abroad.
“He has become a go-to person for Republicans looking to understand Israel and demonstrate their support for it,” said Ken Toltz, a longtime activist with The American Israel Public Affairs Committee who has worked closely with Mizel for decades. “For Larry, it’s about building relationships and giving elected officials or aspiring elected officials that powerful on-the-ground experience that connects them to Israel and to him,” Toltz said.
Mizel hasn’t committed to support the Wisconsin governor, he’s just opening doors for him on the five-day trip as Walker seeks to demonstrate more command of foreign policy issues and national security, the top issue for GOP primary voters according to a recent poll.
“He definitely likes him,” said one Colorado Republican close to Mizel. “But he won’t commit. He will build a relationship and friendship with all of them, but that doesn’t mean he’ll throw his resources behind any of them. That’s just how Larry is.”
Walker has been boning up on foreign policy after making several awkward statements that raised concerns about his fitness to lead at a time marked by global conflict. His gaffes — including a comment that “the most significant foreign policy decision” of his lifetime was when Ronald Reagan fired air traffic controllers, and another suggesting that his experience battling Wisconsin’s teachers unions had prepared him to take on the Islamic State group — have made Walker eager to demonstrate more command of foreign policy and national security, the top issue for primary voters according to a recent poll.
“Within our primary, foreign policy is pre-eminent and that’s probably not something a lot of our candidates planned on,” said John Weaver, a GOP consultant who has advised a number of presidential campaigns. “There are a number of tests you have to pass and this is a big one.”
Ben Carson, who launched his bid for the White House this week, learned the pitfalls of falling short on that test earlier this year. His own “fact-finding mission” to Israel seemed to do more harm than good after a magazine profile depicted him asking staffers incredibly mundane questions about Israel’s legislative body, the Knesset, which he seemed to know nothing about.
Walker, who currently leads many polls of the still unsettled Republican primary field, has yet to officially launch his campaign for the White House. AshLee Strong, a spokeswoman for Walker’s Our American Revival PAC, continues to describe the governor’s RJC-sponsored trip as a “listening tour” but offered few details.
Walker’s new foreign policy adviser, Mike Gallagher, an Iraq War veteran and former Senate Foreign Relations Committee staffer, will be accompanying him as he tours Israel.
“He’s got to build up his foreign policy experience and be able to talk about U.S.-Israel relations because it’s going to come up in the primary,” said Elliott Abrams of the Council on Foreign Relations, who plans to meet with Walker while he’s in Tel Aviv to give a previously scheduled speech.
Walker is wary of being outflanked on Israel issues by other hawkish primary rivals. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, appears to have an inside track for the backing of Paul Singer, a hedge fund billionaire and RJC member from New York — and possibly with Adelson himself. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, another foreign policy hawk likely to enter the presidential race, has also carved out a lane on national security and defense matters.
Rubio visited Israel two years ago, and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie took a similar trip in 2012. Graham touts his on-the-ground experience, not just in Israel but in the broader Middle East, especially visiting battle zones where the U.S. has been engaged.
“I’ve been to Afghanistan 23 times now,” Graham repeatedly told supporters last weekend in South Carolina.
With Jeb Bush and others raising unprecedented sums of money through super PACs that could push the primary fight well into April 2016, Walker is hoping that Jewish Republican donors who are skeptical about Bush can help him keep up.
“Hopefully, foreign policy discussions are not driven by a need to capture fundraising dollars,” Weaver said. “I’m skeptical about that, but hopefully that’s not the case.”
Scott McConnell, co-founder of The American Conservative magazine, was even more blunt.
“He’s doing it because the way the Republican primary is set up, this is the only foreign policy issue that seems to exist,” McConnell said. “The Adelson primary seems to be the only issue that matters.”
Yet support for Israel is also a threshold issue for many in the Republican base.
“This is a strong grass-roots view now,” Abrams said. “You go talk to people in Arkansas and places where there’s not much of a Jewish population and there’s tremendous support for Israel.”
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, a Democrat who is close to Mizel and a number of GOP donors, went on a Mizel-led tour of Israel in 2013 and called it “the most remarkable seven-day trip of my life.”
That trip, as recounted by Hickenlooper, included trips to sites like Jerusalem’s Wailing Wall, the Golan Heights, Yad Vashem and Masada, and featured camel rides, meetings with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a three-hour dinner with former Prime Minister Ehud Barak.
Union-busting Wisconsin governor to visit Israel ahead of expected announcement of bid for White House in 2016.
Likely presidential candidate Scott Walker will meet Israeli and Palestinian entrepreneurs and tour strategic and historic sites during his first trip to Israel.
Given its relationship as a close US ally, and its central role in Middle Eastern relations, Israel is a frequent destination for US politicians, including those running for president. Walker's committee raising money ahead of his expected White House run, Our American Revival, released new details about the Wisconsin governor's five-day trip on Thursday.
Walker has no public events planned for the Israel trip that runs from Saturday to May 14. Walker has billed it as a "listening tour," where he plans to meet with government officials and others to learn more about the Middle East. Walker told reporters in Milwaukee that only staff and advisers are going on the trip. "It's an educational trip. It's not a photo op," he said.
"We're not bringing donors, we're really just bringing staff and people who work with us on national security and foreign policy issues." Walker said he expects to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Our American Revival said Walker plans to make a helicopter tour of "various historical and strategically significant sites," and that he also expects to visit religious sites. The visit is being funded by Our American Revival and the Republican Jewish Coalition.
Walker originally said it would be a taxpayer-funded trade mission, but reversed course after determining that his work would be primarily political. Walker has not officially declared his candidacy for the 2016 presidential race, saying he will announce his decision after the state budget passes, likely in June.
Walker has hired foreign policy advisers and increased his overseas travels as he tries to bolster his resume in that area, a point of potential weakness compared with other potential Republican presidential hopefuls. He's already made trade missions to the United Kingdom, Germany, France and Spain this year. He's leaving for Israel from South Carolina, where he is speaking at an event that's attracting numerous potential Republican presidential candidates.
Likely presidential candidate Scott Walker will meet Israeli and Palestinian entrepreneurs and tour strategic and historic sites during his first trip to Israel.
Given its relationship as a close US ally, and its central role in Middle Eastern relations, Israel is a frequent destination for US politicians, including those running for president. Walker's committee raising money ahead of his expected White House run, Our American Revival, released new details about the Wisconsin governor's five-day trip on Thursday.
Walker has no public events planned for the Israel trip that runs from Saturday to May 14. Walker has billed it as a "listening tour," where he plans to meet with government officials and others to learn more about the Middle East. Walker told reporters in Milwaukee that only staff and advisers are going on the trip. "It's an educational trip. It's not a photo op," he said.
"We're not bringing donors, we're really just bringing staff and people who work with us on national security and foreign policy issues." Walker said he expects to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Our American Revival said Walker plans to make a helicopter tour of "various historical and strategically significant sites," and that he also expects to visit religious sites. The visit is being funded by Our American Revival and the Republican Jewish Coalition.
Walker originally said it would be a taxpayer-funded trade mission, but reversed course after determining that his work would be primarily political. Walker has not officially declared his candidacy for the 2016 presidential race, saying he will announce his decision after the state budget passes, likely in June.
Walker has hired foreign policy advisers and increased his overseas travels as he tries to bolster his resume in that area, a point of potential weakness compared with other potential Republican presidential hopefuls. He's already made trade missions to the United Kingdom, Germany, France and Spain this year. He's leaving for Israel from South Carolina, where he is speaking at an event that's attracting numerous potential Republican presidential candidates.
Statement from White House says administration anticipating consultations on range of issues, including Iran's nuclear aspirations and importance of two-state solution.
The White House said Thursday that "President Obama congratulates Israeli people, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and new governing coalition on formation of Israel's new government."
The official statement came the morning after Netanyahu made a late night deal with Bayit Yehudi's Naftali Bennett on Wednesday night in order to finalize his coalition.
"President Obama looks forward to working with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his new government," read the White House statement. The statement also emphasized the US's close "military, intelligence and security cooperation with Israel, which reflects the deep and abiding partnership between both countries."
The White House said Thursday that "President Obama congratulates Israeli people, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and new governing coalition on formation of Israel's new government."
The official statement came the morning after Netanyahu made a late night deal with Bayit Yehudi's Naftali Bennett on Wednesday night in order to finalize his coalition.
"President Obama looks forward to working with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his new government," read the White House statement. The statement also emphasized the US's close "military, intelligence and security cooperation with Israel, which reflects the deep and abiding partnership between both countries."
Shas: Palestinians to the ovens
"We also look forward to continuing consultations on a range of regional issues, including international negotiations to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and the importance of pursuing a two-state solution," the statement read. Netanyahu and Obama have publicly disagreed about the Iran nuclear deal – a debate that at times led to uncomfortable tension between the US and Israel.
Most notable was Netanyahu's address to Congress just two weeks before the elections in Israel, during which Netanyahu slammed Obama's deal with Iran in a speech that was reportedly planned without Obama's knowledge.
Related: Israel’s Orthodox Rabbis: ‘Palestinians to the Ovens!’
Israeli Politician Calls For Genocide Of Palestinians
"We also look forward to continuing consultations on a range of regional issues, including international negotiations to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and the importance of pursuing a two-state solution," the statement read. Netanyahu and Obama have publicly disagreed about the Iran nuclear deal – a debate that at times led to uncomfortable tension between the US and Israel.
Most notable was Netanyahu's address to Congress just two weeks before the elections in Israel, during which Netanyahu slammed Obama's deal with Iran in a speech that was reportedly planned without Obama's knowledge.
Related: Israel’s Orthodox Rabbis: ‘Palestinians to the Ovens!’
Israeli Politician Calls For Genocide Of Palestinians
4 may 2015
Israeli destruction in Beit Hanoun during the summer 2014 attack on Gaza
Israel's military command perhaps pushes for escalation in order to increase the army's budget, claims a military budget officer in an anonymous Facebook posting. “Wars, operations, exceptional events, they were our way to close gaps in the budget and even build up a reserve for the coming years...Facts are traitors which incite against the army and the state”.
Posting anonymously on Facebook, the officer claims he was compelled to write after reading an interview with a senior military official about Israel's NIS 70 billion defence budget.
“This interview is full of nauseating smugness of the officer, who is trying to again peddle the same lies and threats that if the army is not given more and more billions, he will be forced, no choice, to kill soldiers. That's how it is, if you don't pay, you will bury (the dead).
Indirectly, of course, because if there is no money we will have to again send soldiers in tin cans into Gaza, but the subtext is clear.
Yet amongst all the usual lies, he notes that the budget requested by the army for Operation Protective Edge also serves the ongoing budget of the army...”
The officer adds that “As a budget officer, wars, operations, exceptional events, they were our way to close gaps in the budget and even build up a reserve for the coming years.
In the (Gaza) disengagement, for example, the army succeeded in blackmailing so much money from the state that already in July we managed to close our contracts going forward and we sought where to shove the remaining money. All sorts of projects that weren't approved in the past, building auditoriums, gyms, offices, everything that required money and a lot of it.
It's difficult for me to explain the excitement that could be felt in the hallways of the budget department every time that such an event began. A few qassam rockets made everyone put on combat uniforms and pull from the attic the presentations and files which show, with a disporportionate exaggeration, how much money we've already spent on the operation, that we need it to be returned quickly or the army would collapse.
For every ten soldiers placed to guard a post, we demanded a budget for their uniforms, the food, the ammunitions they are liable to use, heavy combat equipment, depreciation for tanks that would maybe come out of the storerooms, pension for those soldiers for that day and everything possible to put in the presentation with a number beside it. True, the army is supposed to fund the daily existence of these soldiers from its budget, because if there was no operation they would be eating in any event, but facts are traitors which incite against the army and the state.
Occasionally I would feel that the senior command would get so excited from the mountains of money expected to arrive, I had the feeling, God forbid this is just a feeling, of course, that perhaps they pushed for escalation. Only a feeling...”
Speaking to the Haaretz newspaper, the Israeli army spokesperson responded that: “This is an individual statement that does not reflect the numerous approval and supervision processes that exist for the defense budget. All of the funds transferred to the army pass through stringent approval procedures in the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee and the cabinet, and implementation is supervised by the comptroller general division in the finance ministry.”
Israel's military command perhaps pushes for escalation in order to increase the army's budget, claims a military budget officer in an anonymous Facebook posting. “Wars, operations, exceptional events, they were our way to close gaps in the budget and even build up a reserve for the coming years...Facts are traitors which incite against the army and the state”.
Posting anonymously on Facebook, the officer claims he was compelled to write after reading an interview with a senior military official about Israel's NIS 70 billion defence budget.
“This interview is full of nauseating smugness of the officer, who is trying to again peddle the same lies and threats that if the army is not given more and more billions, he will be forced, no choice, to kill soldiers. That's how it is, if you don't pay, you will bury (the dead).
Indirectly, of course, because if there is no money we will have to again send soldiers in tin cans into Gaza, but the subtext is clear.
Yet amongst all the usual lies, he notes that the budget requested by the army for Operation Protective Edge also serves the ongoing budget of the army...”
The officer adds that “As a budget officer, wars, operations, exceptional events, they were our way to close gaps in the budget and even build up a reserve for the coming years.
In the (Gaza) disengagement, for example, the army succeeded in blackmailing so much money from the state that already in July we managed to close our contracts going forward and we sought where to shove the remaining money. All sorts of projects that weren't approved in the past, building auditoriums, gyms, offices, everything that required money and a lot of it.
It's difficult for me to explain the excitement that could be felt in the hallways of the budget department every time that such an event began. A few qassam rockets made everyone put on combat uniforms and pull from the attic the presentations and files which show, with a disporportionate exaggeration, how much money we've already spent on the operation, that we need it to be returned quickly or the army would collapse.
For every ten soldiers placed to guard a post, we demanded a budget for their uniforms, the food, the ammunitions they are liable to use, heavy combat equipment, depreciation for tanks that would maybe come out of the storerooms, pension for those soldiers for that day and everything possible to put in the presentation with a number beside it. True, the army is supposed to fund the daily existence of these soldiers from its budget, because if there was no operation they would be eating in any event, but facts are traitors which incite against the army and the state.
Occasionally I would feel that the senior command would get so excited from the mountains of money expected to arrive, I had the feeling, God forbid this is just a feeling, of course, that perhaps they pushed for escalation. Only a feeling...”
Speaking to the Haaretz newspaper, the Israeli army spokesperson responded that: “This is an individual statement that does not reflect the numerous approval and supervision processes that exist for the defense budget. All of the funds transferred to the army pass through stringent approval procedures in the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee and the cabinet, and implementation is supervised by the comptroller general division in the finance ministry.”
3 may 2015
The US Senate has approved a bill to protect illegal Israeli "Jewish-only" settlements built in occupied Palestinian territories.
The Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015, which is clearly designed with the intent to protect illegal Israeli settlements, was approved by the Senate on Wednesday, according to Al Quds/Days of Palestine.
The act is intended to counter boycott and divestment initiatives, including the labelling of goods originating in the settlements.
The first Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) initiative against the Israeli occupation of Palestine was launched in the US 11 years ago.
Such activities will now be “against US law and consequently illegal”, even though international law deems all settlements to be illegal.
One of the senators who worked on the legislation is Ben Cardin of Maryland, a known supporter of the Israeli occupation who was recently described by Truthout online publication as "a two-state faker".
See: New Pro-Settlement Legislation Pending in US Congress for further info.
The Trade Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015, which is clearly designed with the intent to protect illegal Israeli settlements, was approved by the Senate on Wednesday, according to Al Quds/Days of Palestine.
The act is intended to counter boycott and divestment initiatives, including the labelling of goods originating in the settlements.
The first Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) initiative against the Israeli occupation of Palestine was launched in the US 11 years ago.
Such activities will now be “against US law and consequently illegal”, even though international law deems all settlements to be illegal.
One of the senators who worked on the legislation is Ben Cardin of Maryland, a known supporter of the Israeli occupation who was recently described by Truthout online publication as "a two-state faker".
See: New Pro-Settlement Legislation Pending in US Congress for further info.
