masthead

Powered byWebtrack Logo

Links

The new Netanyahu?

If Bibi actually believes what he has been saying publicly of late, friends of Israel should be worried. Very worried

  Despite a multi-million dollar media blitz, Israelis are not buying the US-financed Geneva Initiative's attempt to convince us that we have a Palestinian partner. A week after the pro-Palestinian group launched its massive online promotion urging people to join its Facebook page, a mere 634 people had answered the call.

The US-funded agitprop involved ads in which senior Fatah propagandists were featured telling Israelis we can trust them this time around. The reason for its failure was made clear by a public opinion poll taken Tuesday night for Channel 10. When asked if they believed that Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas is serious about making peace with Israel, two-thirds of Israelis said no. Only 23 percent said he was serious and 17 percent said they didn't know.

Moreover, most Israelis have had it with the peace paradigm based on Israeli concessions of land and national rights in exchange for Palestinian terror and political warfare. When asked whether the government should extend the prohibition on Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria beyond its Sept 26 terminus, 63 percent said no, it should not. A mere 21 percent of the public believes the government should respond positively to the US demand that Jews continue to be denied our property right in Judea and Samaria.

In his analysis of the results, Channel 10's senior political commentator Raviv Drucker said that if Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu decides to make a deal with the Palestinians, he will have a hard time convincing the public to support him.

Drucker also argued that the results may have been influenced by the Palestinian terror attack on Tuesday night in which four civilians were brutally murdered on their way home from Jerusalem. That is, Drucker implied that the public is driven by its emotions. But what the results actually show is that the public is driven by reason.

When Palestinian terrorists gun down innocent people on the highway simply because they are Jews, the public's reasoned response is to say that the Palestinians do not want peace. The public's wholly rational reaction to this act of anti-Jewish butchery is to insist that Jews should not be denied our basic civil and human rights in a dangerous bid to appease murderers.

The poll's final question regarded Netanyahu and his intentions at the new round of land for peace negotiations in Washington. Slightly more than half of the public believes that Netanyahu is serious in his pursuit of a deal with the Palestinians and a mere 34 percent believe that he is not serious.

This last response is interesting for two reasons. First it is a strong indication that the public trusts Netanyahu's word. Since taking office a year and a half ago, Netanyahu has said repeatedly that he supports making a deal with Fatah. And a majority of the public believes him.

The second conclusion suggested by the result is more discouraging. With the public convinced that the Palestinians are not to be trusted and that Israel should stop making concessions, the majority of the public believes that Netanyahu is moving in the opposite direction. Netanyahu's statements in Washington give us ample reason for concern.

On Wednesday evening, ahead of a dinner at the White House with US President Barack Obama, Abbas, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah, Netanyahu made a startling statement.

He said, "I have been making the case for Israel all my life. But I did not come here to win an argument. I came here to forge a peace. I did not come here to play a blame game where even the winners lose. I came here to achieve a peace that will bring benefits to all."

This statement is worth considering carefully. Does Netanyahu truly believe that by "making the case for Israel" he and others who speak out in defense of Israel have merely been argumentative?

Does he think that defending Israel's rights diminishes the prospects for peace and so those that defend Israel are actually harming it?

Does he believe that in calling the Palestinians out for their brutality, barbarism and hatred of Jews and Israel he and his fellow advocates for Israel have merely been playing a blame game?

Does he think that a peace forged on the basis of ignoring Israel's case will be a viable peace?

If Netanyahu does believe all of these things - and his statement on Wednesday evening indicates he does, then the public should be very worried. Indeed, if this is what the premier believes, then it is just a matter of time before he begins echoing his predecessor Ariel Sharon and tells us that we are too dim witted to understand him because the world looks different from where he is sitting than from our lowly perches on the ground, in Israel.

And this brings us back to Tuesday evening's highway massacre. Predictably, the Obama administration led the way in framing the terrorist violence as a bid by Hamas to derail the newest round of negotiations. For example, after meeting with Netanyahu Wednesday Obama said, "The tragedy that we saw yesterday where people were gunned down on the street by terrorists who are purposely trying to undermine these talks is an example of what we're up against."

The only party that rejected the administration's rationalization of the attack was Hamas, whose operatives reportedly carried it out. In an interview Thursday with the London-based Asharq al Awsat, Hamas leader Mahmoud A-Zahar said that the talks have nothing to do with the attack. As he put it, "The bid to link this operation to the negotiations is completely wrong. When people have the opportunity, the capability and the targets, they act."

The truth is probably found neither in A-Zahar's claim nor in Obama's assertion. In all likelihood, Hamas was testing the waters. Iran's Palestinian proxy wanted to know whether the regular rules for peace processes have kicked into gear yet. Those rules -- as the families of the hundreds of Israelis murdered by Palestinian terrorists during the peak years of peace processes will attest -- involve Israel giving free rein to terrorists to murder Jews during "peace talks."

Since Yitzhak Rabin first shook Yassir Arafat's hand on the White House lawn 17 years ago, successive prime ministers have opted to not to retaliate for murderous attacks when peace talks are in session. They have justified their willingness to give the likes of Hamas a free hand to murder by claiming that fighting back would be tantamount to allowing terrorists to hold the peace process hostage. Conducting counter-terror campaigns in the midst of negotiations, they have uniformly argued, would endanger the talks and so, Hamas, Fatah and Islamic Jihad must all be given a carte blanche to murder.

Echoing these sentiments precisely, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, IDF Chief of General Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi and Shin Bet Director Yuval Diskin all reportedly objected to launching any response to Tuesday's attack. According to the media, the three closed ranks against Netanyahu who reportedly wished to attack Hamas targets in Gaza following the massacre.

Wednesday's roadside shooting attack, in which a man and his wife were wounded, was a clear indication that Hamas and its ilk received the message. Just as A-Zahar said, they are always looking for an opportunity. And in not responding to Tuesday's attack, Israel told them that for the duration of these negotiations, Hamas can again kill with impunity.

Whether Hamas renewed its terror attacks this week because it likes to murder Jews, because it was trying to derail negotiations or because it was testing Israel, the fact of the matter is that from Hamas's perspective, it stood only to gain from attacking. Terror is always popular with the Palestinian public. As the Jerusalem Post reported, when news broke of Tuesday's attack, mobs of Palestinians in Judea and Samaria took to the streets to celebrate.

Part of the reason that Palestinians love terrorism is because they have never had to pay a real price for killing Jews. To the contrary, they have been richly rewarded. The Palestinians believe that it was terror, not negotiations that convinced Israel to withdraw from Gaza. So too, as they glance at the international response to their acts of wanton murder, they see terror has only benefitted them. International monetary assistance and political support for the Palestinians have always risen as terror levels peaked.

Obama's insistence that the talks go on after Tuesday's attack showed the Palestinians that the game is still theirs to win. The US will continue to side with the Palestinian demands against Israel regardless of their behavior.

In Netanyahu's defense, his speech on Wednesday evening was not simply a repudiation of his life's work on behalf of Israel. Netanyahu seemed to hedge his bets when he said, "We left Lebanon, we got terror. We left Gaza, we got terror. We want to ensure that territory we concede will not be turned into a third Iranian sponsored terror enclave aimed at the heart of Israel. That is why a defensible peace requires security arrangements that can withstand the test of time and the many challenges that are sure to confront us."

The problem with this statement is that in light of the free pass he gave Hamas for Tuesday's attack, Netanyahu already conceded this crucial principle. If he believes that the only way for the talks to advance is to stand down in the face of attack rather than aggressively strike back, then Netanyahu has already committed himself to a peace that will create "a new Iranian sponsored terror enclave aimed at the heart of Israel."

Likewise, if he believes that only by ceasing to make Israel's case can he make progress with his "partner" Abbas, then Netanyahu has already conceded his demand that a peace agreement contain security arrangements that will defend Israel's national rights and other vital interests.

The most distressing aspect of Netanyahu's enthusiastic participation in a process the Israeli public rationally opposes is that it is him doing it. With Netanyahu now joining the ranks of those that attack Israel's defenders as enemies of peace and claim that defending the country is antithetical to peace, who is left to defend us?


# reads: 361

Original piece is http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0910/glick090310.php3?printer_friendly


Print
Printable version

Tell us what you think


I don t have enemies. My name is not Anon either. One does not have to agree with me or buy my message. However, I contend that I am well informed on the subject and find it a bit toppy to read comments from people who basically have no basis to make their case on such sensitive issues. I do not defend a particular political stream or a politician. All I say is that following a pie in the sky is a bad way to plan for a country"s future.

Posted on 2010-09-13 14:32:18 GMT


I have no problem with people saying what they think, I also believe that people should use their time and resources to say things when they have full understanding of a given situation and not rush to offer flawed and utterly erroneous opinions because they fall in love with an idea. Over the centuries the Jews followed numerous Messiahs, it go them nowhere. Feiglin is what is known in Yiddish as a Fertle Off (1/4 chicken)

Posted on 2010-09-13 01:43:56 GMT


For what it s worth I happen to not only have been engaged with the media in Israel and overseas for many decades, but also served in the IDF during the 1967-1973 engagements like every one who was born in Israel, therefore, I do not pass casually my opinions, I speak with some knowledge, having see the settlement movement develop right from its inception. I simply find it a bit rich for clueless outsiders to assume they can gage the mood of the public and know what is best for the future of the nation. These types, do not watch regularly Israeli T.V, nor read the Israeli dailies or even listen to the Voice of Israel. (available on the internet) therefore they have no way of knowing what is really happening. In my opinion it is best to let those who live there deal with it.Outsiders, who will not pay with their blood for the wrong outcome could be a bit more circumspect with their authoritative opinions based on casual reading on the internet. Ms. Glick lives a short distance from the Knesset, she made her commitment to the state and she can say what she likes, she also served in uniform and happens to knows a great deal, but she is not right on everything. Feiglin is a false messiah! I recall in the 80"s how the mad dog, racist Rabbi Kahane, who I saw close and in person in saw in action was touted as the great patriotic hope for Israel. Few in Israel regret his departure. His followers, the same extremists who make most of the trouble in the West Bank today,are no kids anymore, their children are now serving in the IDF, yet they carry on with the same fervor and devotion as if Kahane is still around the corner. In his absence they run with Feiglin and will follow him to the end. Is it so smart? What can he achieve? Like the false Obama, promoted as the great Healer of the Ocanes once he got the keys he was clueless, with not a single good idea. If Feiglin was given power, he"d be as clueless and awkward, but with a rightist bent. There is no doubt in my mind that if he got close to power his rise will cause grave security problems.

Posted on 2010-09-12 04:04:24 GMT


By the way, I realize that not living in Israel, I can"t possibly understand the shadow you live in and the constant threat of war with the lunatics all around you. But it"s now more than ever that you need someone who is courageous enough not to sell Israel out.

Posted by Dee Graf on 2010-09-09 09:20:30 GMT


Yes, you"re right, I"m not living in Israel. Moshe Feiglin just happens to be a hero of mine along with Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic. What I know of Feiglin is not from media reports but from digging deep into this extraordinary man"s biography. Very little of what the media says can be taken at face value barring a few outstanding journalists like Caroline Glick. Yes, I"m aware of what has gone on between Feiglin and some power brokers in the Likud. It was reading about all of this which initially woke me up to what Netanyahu is all about. Once upon a time, I thought Bibi was the answer to Israel"s predicament; now I think his strings are pulled by outsiders. He quite simply doesn"t have the guts to do what is right. Re: what the "mainstream" thinks, much of what we think the mainstream thinks is what the media tells us they think.

Posted by Dee Graf on 2010-09-09 09:15:39 GMT


It appears to me that Mr/Ms. Dee Graf is not a person who was or is on the ground in Israel, with familiarity with the political moves. It is easy to form opinion from far away, based on news reports, often, inaccurate and more often biased and untrue. Indeed Feiglin is not afraid to stand his ground, he has his opinions but he represents an element that is far from the nation"s mainstream. Unless one wishes a trip to the first century, total confrontation and resurrection of the Temple, after a nuclear jib jab, it is best to forget about this fringe represented by mad man Feiglin. Is Dee Graf aware of the fact that before the recent election in israel Feiglin tried to organize a putch in the Likood Obama style (referring to the criminal activities in the Texas primaries 2008 to steal from Mme. Clinton the majority delegates she was getting from her supporters), this chap is closer to the Ayatollahs than the Tel-Aviv beach surfer. When the chips are down, would you run to defend Israel when the Feiglin forces are fighting the bloody war? Many Israelis will return to defend the country, but not under a Feiglin Cabinet, this you can take to the bank.

Posted on 2010-09-09 04:38:46 GMT


I don"t worship Feiglin, but leaders like him (or what he could be if given a chance) are few and far between. This is a man unafraid to stand on principle and integrity which seems to be considered stupid and naive these days. How this world could be transformed if one by one the courageous of this world began to stand up to the thugs!

Posted by Dee Graf on 2010-09-08 23:37:48 GMT


Sadly, the "commentateur" who worships Feiglin does not get the point that this type is very much on the edge of the mainstream. If Uri Avneri and the Commie-Arab Israeli Clowns represent the very far Left, Feiglin is the opposite side on the Right. Those who have no experience of seeing these characters in real life, as they got started, what they really stand for need to understand, that in today"s context for pathetic characters like Feiglin Bibi is considered weak. Yet, when it comes to rule, to govern, manage, take responsibility they are clueless. Like Obama, the mentored Commie - Community organizer, who had a clever spin and lots of position speeches, when it came time to be presidential all he could do is bow to tyrants and blame his predecessor. It is a mistake to buy the Feiglin "narishkeit". Israel went through too many charlatans-false messiahs.This man is not only dangerous and extreme but is prone to violence and could make more trouble than Israel can handle. I am not cheer-leading Bibi, but at the moment the rest of the wrecking crew is much worse. Every Israeli knows that there are no "LEADERS" in the Knesset, they are all a bunch of sad and very corrupt "aparatchicks", including the so called members of the "Kitchen Cabinet"

Posted on 2010-09-07 12:04:18 GMT


I have never been quite as worried about Jewish leaders making dovish sounding concessions as some of the posters in this list. This is because the Arabs will certainly reject any and all offers - after pretending to consider them. Until an Arab leader comes along who is likely to genuinely accept an Israeli offer, Israel"s supporters don"t need to "worry", they (merely) need to remain vigilant.

Posted by RZ on 2010-09-06 22:52:53 GMT


Unfortunately, I don"t think Netanyahu is, or ever was, what he represented himself to be. Just ask Moshe Feiglin - http://www.jewishisrael.org/eng_contents/about/bio01.html what Netanyahu and other "globally minded" members of the Likud are all about. Yes friends of Israel should be very very worried.

Posted by Dee Graf on 2010-09-06 21:43:44 GMT


A more critical view could be gleaned from an American Thiker/Israpundit take: http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/09/the_significance_of_the_israel.html What the writers have to keep in mind is the fact that today unlike 30 years ago a big number of the soldiers in the IDF are observant, or religious in various forms. It makes decisions that could impact the settlements much harder. The majority of the inhabitants are from the faithful. They also comprise a bigger block of voters as they used to be during the earlier days of the state. They also breed much faster. They know how to blackmail and bribe.They are well networked and recieve moral support from overseas communities. Like the Communists to whom the end justifies the means, for Eretz Israel, they will do much more than the Tel-Aviv trendies. The IDF cannot count anymore on the cool Ironiim (urbanites) they need a steady number of new, willing recruits. It makes any move, so much more harder, and all those who believe that Kadima or others can bring about a change or a "deal" are off with their heads. Bibi has few inches to move between a civil war and a putch. He survived two nasty U.S presidents. He will have to prevail, Ein Breirah!

Posted on 2010-09-06 19:41:56 GMT


For those who remember Bibi from way back, the operating software is simple: Bibi does not want to be deposed and will do what it takes to navigate through the storms without getting too wet. he endured a coup plot by the Clintons 1996, another by the Community organizing - hustler from Chicago and by the Kadima lot which got more votes than the Likood Party but could not form a coalition with the wet Labor party. It is an ugly dance but like Castro who survived many failed U.S presidents, several awkward marriages, personal scandals going back to the 80"s, disreputable political partners, hungry and biased media (local and overseas) Bibi, a former member of will have to give his best.

Posted on 2010-09-06 14:52:25 GMT


Lori, you do have a strong band of brother"s on side, one can only hope. That"s one thing I"m sure Elie would say who has no illusions.

Posted by lynne Newington on 2010-09-06 11:31:50 GMT


I am going to be very politically incorrect here, because that"s the only way to tell the truth, peace with the arabs is NOT possible now, in ten years or in seventy years. They do not KNOW peace even it if hit them on the face, nor among themselves, or with any other.The biggest problem is no body has the backbone to tell the "palestinians" they have no desire for peace and therefore war is the only way.Arabs have a violent god, and they obey him, this is a religious matter friends, and hate of Israel is taught at a young age, because the koran tell it so. There, I"ve said it, if it offends them, so be it!

Posted by Lori Low on 2010-09-06 11:02:18 GMT


I would be very interested in knowing what Elie Wesiel"s view is on this issue.

Posted on 2010-09-06 09:50:43 GMT