Terrorists for Israeli Soldiers: A Convergence On Appeasement

Now that Olmert's Convergence plan is off the table for the time being, the rumors persist that he is involved in other ways to deal with terrorism: trading for the lives of kidnapped soldiers with the release of prisoners.

Leaving aside just which and how many prisoners/terrorists would be released, the plan--rumor or not--is already having its effect.

According to World Net Daily:

Palestinian terror organizations are currently training in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to carry out operations aimed at kidnapping Israeli soldiers, said a terror leader whose group in June abducted Israeli Defense Forces soldier Gilad Shalit.

The leader thanked the international community for what he said was its recognition that kidnappings of Israeli soldiers are not considered terrorism but "military operations that bring very big results."

He told WorldNetDaily the "best way" to gain the freedom of thousands of Palestinians being held in Israeli jails, including convicted terrorists, is by more kidnappings of Israeli soldiers.

"We are now planning and training for the next kidnappings. Even if [Israel] releases hundreds of prisoners in exchange for Shalit, we still have thousands more to liberate. More Israeli soldiers must be abducted," said the terror leader, who spoke on condition of anonymity amid reports Israel is considering releasing hundreds of Palestinian prisoners in exchange for Shalit.

Thanking the international community for recognizing that the kidnappings of Israeli soldiers are not considered terrorism but "military operations that bring very big results."

Nice touch.

Meanwhile, the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers seems to be so successful that it has attracted new groups:

A previously unknown group, which said it is based in the Golan Heights,
threatened Wednesday to abduct Israeli soldiers to swap them for Syrian
prisoners in Israel.

In a statement faxed to foreign news agencies in Damascus, a group calling itself the Men of the National Syrian Resistance threatened to "take the necessary measures" to secure the release of 16 Syrians jailed in Israel.

...Referring to Hezbollah, whose July 12 capture of two Israeli soldiers sparked a 34-day war with Israel, the statement said: "The Lebanese model, the model of Hezbollah, is not so far from us concerning implementation and preparations to release our detainees."

The implications of all this for Israel's going into Gaza and Lebanon to force the release of the kidnapped soldiers is not good:

According to government spokesmen, Israel's harsh military response to the kidnappings in Lebanon and Gaza has taught our enemies that from now on, there will be a heavy price to pay for kidnappings.

However, this response has not persuaded the Lebanese and Gazans to release the soldiers without getting something in return. In exchange for Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, in Lebanon, and Gilad Shalit, in the Gaza Strip, Israel will have to release hundreds of prisoners to Lebanon and the territories.

On the issue of whether Hezbollah won the war in Lebanon, there is debate back and forth.

Does anyone doubt that if Olmert trades prisoners/terrorists for Shalit, it will be an unqualified victory for Hamas and Palestinian terrorists?

Technorati Tag: Israel and Hamas and Olmert and Goldwasser and Regev and Shalit.

West Bank Settlements May Be Legal

One more nail in the coffin of Convergence?

Arutz Sheva: Legal Forum: ´Unauthorized Outposts´ Are Legal Communities
23:44 Sep 03, '06 / 10 Elul 5766
by Ezra HaLevi

A group of legal experts called the the Land of Israel Legal Forum says that most of the Jewish civilian outposts in Judea and Samaria deemed "unauthorized" are, in fact, perfectly legal.

The Legal forum has submitted an official request to present ifs findings to the Ministerial Committee On Outposts.

The story began in March, 2005, when former head of the State Prosecution Criminal Department Talia Sasson released a report which declared that some 150 outlying Jewish neighborhoods in Judea and Samaria were illegal. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon commissioned the report, which led to demands from within and from without Israel to expel the Jewish residents and destroy their homes.

In a recent development, Haaretz newspaper reported that the Justice Ministry would soon present the relevant Ministerial Committee with a proposal whereby many of the civilian communities in question would be legalized and assisted. Attorney Talia Sasson, in turn, requested to appear before the committee to argue that the Jewish civilian outposts have no legal standing.

The Legal Forum is requesting equal treatment in order to present committee members with their claim that the communities are in fact “fully authorized.”

Though according to the Sasson Report, the establishment of an outpost requires government approval, such a regulation was not put in place until December 6th, 2004, when Attorney General Menachem Mazuz issued the directive. Until then, the Legal Forum says, the status of an outpost was regulated in accordance with Government Resolution 150 from August 2, 1996, which stipulated that the Defense Minister had the authority to authorize new outpost communities.

Nearly all of the Jewish neighborhoods deemed "unauthorized" by Talia Sasson were established before Mazuz’s 2004 stipulation and are therefore, in fact, legally authorized. “It seems that Atty. Sasson was trying to enforce legal directives against communities that were already in existence before the new guidelines were issued,” a Forum statement said.

Then again, thet Jewish communities in Gaza were legal too.

Technorati Tag: Israel and West Bank and Settlements.

Olmert Accepts Blame For Operation's 'Failings'

That's the title of the Washington Post article this morning:

"There have been failings and shortcomings," Olmert, with deep circles under his eyes and a haggard look on his face, told a special session of the Israeli parliament. "We need to examine ourselves in all aspects and all areas. We will not sweep anything under the table, we will not hide anything. We must ensure that next time things will be done better."

Only one thing missing--where does Olmert accept blame? Much later in the article, it is clear that,to his credit, Olmert does in fact accept full responsibility for Israel's failure against Hezbollah:

"The responsibility for this operation lies with me," the prime minister said during his address before the Knesset, the Israeli parliament. "I am not asking to share this responsibility with anyone whatsoever.

Still it is disheartening to hear Olmert say "we must ensure that next time things will be done better," which many Israelis will blame on Israel's failure to deal Hezbollah a decisive blow:

The anguish, disappointment and confusion are widespread among soldiers who believe their leadership sent them to war unprepared, among residents of northern Israel who say their government abandoned its most vulnerable citizens, and among a public that believes its prime minister has left them open to future attack by agreeing to a cease-fire many think is not permanent. (emphasis added)

Olmert has even lost the backing of the media in Israel which has not hesitated to publish countless negative interviews with civlians matched by equally critical evaluations by the Israeli media itself.

In the end, he is reduced to claiming that the IDF "has struck a major blow to this murderous organization," while at the same time admitting that "the extent is not known."

At least Olmert has stopped trumpeting his intent to follow the Convergence Plan--and for good reason, according to the Jerusalem Post:

A month and a half ago, the IDF and police were preparing to dismantle three settler outposts, a dress rehearsal for Olmert's master-plan, realignment. Few believe that in the current public climate, especially since the settlers' share in the war's death-toll has been so high, Olmert can go ahead with what was the main plank of his electoral platform.

Painful retreats and peace-plans are only possible under popular prime ministers - Menachem Begin with the Egyptian treaty, Yitzhak Rabin at Oslo and Ariel Sharon and his disengagement. A discredited prime minister going ahead with such a controversial plan, whatever its merits, is a recipe for chaos and even civil war. And without realignment, the entire justification for Olmert's premiership will have dissolved. Less than six months since the election and once this war is over, Olmert's sole aim will be to survive as PM. The moment that happens to a prime minister, it's a sure sign that the countdown to his departure has begun.

Israel was supposed to have learned from the Yom Kippur War.
Now she is supposed to learn from her failure in this war against Hezbollah.
How many such opportunities can Israel safely endure?

Technorati Tag: Israel and Olmert and Lebanon and Hizbollah and Hezbollah.

Olmert Said What?!

Which of the following has Olmert said:

a. "There is an honest, real will on my part to give a lot and receive little in return."
b. If "the terrorist organizations impose a violent confrontation, both Israelis and the Palestinians will have to bear the consequences.".
c. That Israel's success in Lebanon will create "new momentum" for the Convergence Plan
d. All of the above

Yes, that was easy--wasn't it!

Olmert's latest is reported byArutz Sheva:

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told The Associated Press today that he feels Israel's success in Lebanon will create "new momentum" for his plan to unilaterally withdraw from most of Judea and Samaria.

Contrary to many Israeli analysts, who feel that the unilateral retreat from both Lebanon and Gaza strengthened the terrorists' resolve to fight Israel, Olmert appears to believe that he has now proven that Israel can fight off any attack that emanates from territory abandoned by Israel.

Naturally, Olmert's statment to AP has created something of an uproar.

It's not as if this is the first time since the Hamas kidnapping that Olmert has openly expressed the idea that his Convergence will still move forward, regardless of the current situation--but Olmert's persistence in expressing that view is increasingly disconcerting. Like an amateur salesman who nervously gives the same identical pitch to an unconvinced custom unable to take 'no' for an answer, Olmert is unable to stop talking about--let alone give up on--the idea of evacuating Jews out of the West Bank.

But even taken on its face, Olmert's statement--made during a time that Israel is dealing with the effects of the blanket withdrawal from both southern Lebanon and Gaza--seems to make no sense:

1. Even if the IDF is hugely successful both in Gaza, the fact remains that it took a year of Kassam rockets before real action was taken--and even then, it was the kidnapping of an IDF soldier that initiated a response. Even then, the initial operation was to get Shalit back. Only later did the operation in northern Gaza, where the Kassams are being fired from, begin.

Likewise, the war in Lebanon was ignited by the kidnapping of IDF soldiers. Since Hizbollah is likely to live to terrorize another day, the lesson they will have learned will merely be to re-evaluate their tactics and timing--not to cease attacks.

2. Even from his Olmert's perspective, by tying the future of his Convergence Plan with war with Hizbollah, anything less than a clear and demonstrative victory will not only not help his case for evacuation, but weaken it even further--assuming logic and reason have any role at all in this government. And at this point it is hard to imagine a realistic scenario where Hizbollah cannot claim some sort of victory, even if only by virtue of surviving.

The remaining question is: why is Olmert so desperate to push his Convergence Plan, even at the risk of reassuring the very enemies Israel is in the middle of a war with?

It's odd, and very troubling.

Muqata has thoughts on Olmert's statement...and Tisha B'Av

Technorati Tag: Israel and Olmert.

Sharansky: Only Olmert Could Have Pulled This Off

Joel Mowbray reports from Israel via Powerline about his interview with Natan Sharansky:

Ariel Sharon would not have responded this strongly because he was so concerned with changing his image, and while Bibi would have done exactly the same thing as Olmert is, half of the country would have been protesting about what the ‘monster’ is doing,” explained former Israeli cabinet member and world-famous dissident Natan Sharansky.

Choosing his words as he stirred his breakfast shake, Sharanksy suggested that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, with his center-left coalition, is perhaps the only leading figure capable of a muscular response to Hamas and Hezbollah that enjoys overwhelming public support. He seems almost relieved when he says, “This is a unique moment of unity.”

Needless to say, this is not what most people are probably thinking--and Sharansky saying it does not make it so--but it is an interesting point of view.

Of course, if Olmert has support when it comes to Hizbollah, he does not have it when it comes to his plan for Convergence.

IMRA reports on a poll taken today:

In your opinion, in light of what recently took place in Gaza, was the
disengagement plan [AL: the retreat from Gaza] justified?
Yes 44%
No 31%
Don't know/other replies 25%

Are you for or against Ehud Olmert's convergence plan? [AL: aka
"consolidation plan", retreat from most of the West Bank]
For 19%
Against 52%
Don't know/other replies 29%

In your opinion, do most of the citizens of the State of Israel have enough
information about Ehud Olmert's convergence plan?
Yes 11%
No 71%
Don't know/other replies 18%

Still Sharansky's point is interesting, if for no other reason than that one might have thought that if Sharon was still Prime Minster--Hizbollah would not have started this, let alone Hamas.

According to Mowbray, there are high-ranking members of Kadimah itself who say that the Convergence Plan is dead--for now.

In any case, it would seem that Hizbollah underestimated both the kind and degree of response that Olmert was capable of, even assuming he was pressured into it.

Mowbray concludes with with the following cautious note by Sharansky:

“I hope he’s not making one mistake, and that is planning for more weeks ahead. At most, he will have days.” Why, I asked him, will Israel only have days, especially if Hezbollah continues firing rockets into Israeli civilian areas? “Because of the world,” he answered. “At the moment Israel starts becoming successful, the world tells us to stop.”

Israel's military might not be thinking along the same lines. Yesterday's Jerusalem Post quotes a high-ranking officer, who gave the following assessment of the progress made against Hizbollah thus far:

About 25 percent of Hizbullah's capabilities have been hit, a high-ranking IDF officer estimated on Sunday night at the end of the fifth day of Operation Just Reward.

According to the officer, the group's chain of command is still functioning. He estimated that the Lebanese group would not be annihilated when the dust settles, only severely damaged.

The officer predicted that the operation would end in the middle of next week. [emphasis added]

Israel is now in a fight against time, not so much against her enemies as against those who should be her allies.

Crossposted at Israpundit

Technorati Tag: Israel and Olmert and Sharansky and Hizbollah and Hezbollah and Mowbray.

Do Israeli Prime Ministers Have Speech Writers?

Last month, Olmert was quoted by The Jerusalem Post as saying:

There is an honest, real will on my part to give a lot and receive little in return.

That is quite a statement.
This week, Olmert has outdone himself.

According to Arutz Sheva, in a news conference with foreign journalists, Olmert confirmed that he will be going ahead with the 'Convergence Plan' and unilaterally withdraw from Judea and Samaria. At the same time, Olmert admitted:

"There has been no occupation in Gaza since August last year and since then there hasn't been one day of quiet for the citizens of Israel.

But wait, there's more:

He emphasized that Israel has no desire to topple the Hamas-led Palestinian Authority government, but does indeed intend to take the steps necessary to "prevent terrorists from inflicting terrorism on the Israeli people."

How Olmert plans to prevent terrorism while allowing Hamas to stay in control is unclear, especially considering how long Operation Summer Rain was under way before the IDF was allowed to move into northern Gaza to address the Kassam threat.

Olmert also told the reporters that if

"the terrorist organizations impose a violent confrontation, both Israelis and the Palestinians will have to bear the consequences."

This is not exactly encouraging.

Which all raises the question: Do Israeli Prime Ministers have speech writers?

Technorati Tag: Israel and Olmert and Terrorism and Gaza.

Putin, The Vatican, And Olmert's Redemption

When Bnei Yisrael left Egypt, they were at their strongest following the drowning of the Egyptian army at the Red Sea. No nation considered attacking them, but Amalek did--and like the first person into a pool of hot water who cools it down and paves the way for others, so too Amalek showed that Israel was mortal and made her more vulnerable in the eyes of her enemies.

By disengaging from Gaza in response to Palestinian terrorism, and resorting to rhetoric instead of action in the face of the Kassam rockets, Israel became more vulnerable in the eyes of Hamas and the other Palestinian terrorists.

It is still not clear what Israel's reaction to the kidnapping of Gilad Shavit will do to change the perception of weakness in the eyes of her enemies.

But based on what has been in the news, there may be hope.

On the one hand, Iran thumbs its nose at the world while developing nuclear capabilities, North Korea shows off the range of its missiles, and Venezuela shows off the Russian jets it has acquired. The world responds with rhetoric.

But on the other hand, Russia has sent agents to kill those responsible for the murder of their diplomats. The more aggressive stance is also reflected in the policy of the Vatican, which has revised it's policy towards Islam and according to the Jerusalem Post is for the first time indicating that radical Islam, and not Israel, is the central problem of Christians living among Moslems. While the Vatican is terming their policy one of reciprocity, the Jerusalem Post notes that

This balanced, serious approach marks a profound improvement in understanding that could have implications well beyond the Church, given how many lay politicians heed its leadership in inter-faith matters. Should Western states also promote the principle of reciprocity, the results should indeed be interesting.

It was the Jerusalem Post that also had an article last month that claimed that support for the Palestinian Arabs was falling among the 'opinion elites' in Europe.

Maybe, slowly, there are countries that are ready to react and fight back. I remember that when the Americans were held hostage in Iran during Carter's administration, some said that Iranians would never dream of doing the same to Russian citizens for fear of what they would do. Later, the Russian reputation was severely damaged in Afghanistan and fell further in their conflict with Chechnya. Yet there is a sense that Russia, and her reputation, are on the rebound as a country to be taken seriously.

The Vatican apparently is taking a stronger stand under Pope Benedict XVI and though the Vatican--with all due respect to Dan Brown--cannot respond militarily, they do seem to be eschewing the purely diplomatic approach.

Where does Israel stand in all this? Bombing empty buildings and fields or flying low in Syria is not doing the trick. Nor are the empty threats that Israel is not going to take it any more. For that matter, responding to the kidnapping of Shalit but hesitating to take action in Northern Gaza in response to the Kassam rockets does not send much of a message either.

As Jonathan Rosenblum points out, stopping the Kassams in the only way possible--sending the IDF into Gaza--reveals the folly of Olmert's Convergence Plan and risks negative world reaction. Even after having committed to sending the IDF into Northern Gaza Olmert and Shimon "Kassams, Shmassams" Peres still seem to be stopping short of really dealing with the Kassam threat, instead satisfying themselves with establishing a buffer zone--allowing the impression that the firing of those rockets is a normal event.

Putin's actions and those of the Vatican illustrate that it is possible to change policy, and by implementing it consistently change how they are perceived. Consistency means not just repetition, but that the different statements issued and the actions taken all jive with each other. Assassinating terrorist leaders by itself is not going to cut it for Israel, and the inevitable collateral damage is going to provide an easy windfall for the Palestinian terrorists. The justification for Operation Summer Rain is not just the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit, but the almost daily Kassam rockets being fired into Israel from Gaza. Olmert's government may yet be able to redeem itself.

If a trend is developing in the West in reaction against the terrorists and the thugs, then now is the time for Israel to get on board--and if the trend has not started yet, now is the time for Israel to take the lead.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Olmert and Shalit and Gaza and Putin and Hamas and Palestinians and Terrorism.

Myth of Palestinian Demographic Timebomb Affects More Than Just Israel

The issue of demographics in Israel used to be a vague, abstract, gnawing issue. In 2002, Ben Wattenberg wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal that Israel needn't worry about a population implosion. But the demographics problem continued to be discussed--until it became an issue for 2 concrete calls for action in 2 different countries.

On the one hand, the demographic time bomb of the growing Palestinian Arab population was one of the reasons given to justify the need for the Disengagement. On the other hand the findings of American Researchers Bennett Zimmerman, Roberta Seid, and Michael Wise--which seem to indicate that the numbers for the Arab population in Gaza and the West Bank have been highly inflated, while Jewish births and immigration forecasts are underestimated--found their way to the US Congress.

These findings, supported in part by the Palestinian Arabs themselves,were presented in March to the Middle East Subcommittee of the House International Relations Committee, chaired by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the Republican Congresswoman of Florida--who in January proposed legislation, which would cut American funding to both the PA and the UN, designate the PA a "terrorist sanctuary," and close down some of the PA offices in the US, in order to reduce Palestinian-American diplomatic ties.

But the issue of Palestinian demographics was relevant to the committee for a different reason. The importance of the Zimmerman report for the US, as noted by World Net Daily, is that

almost $3 billion in United States taxpayer funds may have been provided as aid to the Palestinians in part based on fraudulent data.

"American tax dollars and other international humanitarian aid have been based on inflated population numbers which have been accepted without question by governments and aid agencies. Our researchers pointed out that money has been spent to help Palestinians who were double-counted, never born or not present in the West Bank and Gaza," Bennet Zimmerman, head of the new study, titled "Arab Population in the West Bank and Gaza," told WND.

Of course, one could assume that Europe might be interested in the possibility that the Palestinians may have swindled them as well.

In an article in the Summer 5766/2006 issue of Azure entitle Voodoo Demographics, Zimmerman, Seid and Weiss lay out all the ways the Palestinian Arab population was miscounted:

In sum: By double-counting the Jerusalem Arabs and counting Arabs living abroad, the Palestinians inflated their base data for 1997 by 648,000. By predicting unrealistically high rates of natural population growth, the number was inflated by an additional 276,000; and by falsely predicting massive immigration to Gaza and the West Bank, and ignoring the significant net emigration of Palestinians from the territories, the PCBS[Palestine Central Bureau of Statistics] further inflated the numbers by another 415,000. If we add these figures together, by 2004 the PCBS figures had managed to inflate the population in the West Bank and Gaza by some 1.34 million people-more than 50 percent. When the pcbs’ numerous errors are corrected, the Palestinian Arab population for Gaza and the West Bank drops to 2.49 million people, with 1.42 million in the West Bank and 1.07 million in Gaza in mid-2004.

Now, in answer to criticism that their results were given in the form of a presentation instead of actual published research, in February the group published an academic research paper through Bar-Ilan's Begin-Sadat Center Center for Strategic Research--allowing the findings to be properly analyzed. It can be downloaded as a PDF from the Bar Ilan University website.

One possible weakness of the report is that for their prediction for 2025, the group has left their research data for Gaza out of their calculations because, as they note elsewhere in their article Gaza "is no longer under any kind of Israeli rule, and therefore is of questionable relevance when speaking of a demographic threat" Thus, according to their prediction, as Haaretz puts it:

7.5 million Jews will be living in Israel and the West Bank then, constituting 63 percent of the population, as compared to 4.45 million Arabs (of these, 2.25 million in the West Bank), or 37 percent of the population. In other words, for every Arab, there will be two Jews. The population in Israel proper will be 77 percent Jews and 23 percent Arabs - not much different from today.

But the bottom line question remains whether Israel is free and clear of the demographic time bomb that was calculated into the considerations for Sharon's Disengagement and for Olmert's Convergence Plan. In their article, they address this point:

Do the Jews of Israel face a demographic threat? The answer is still a qualified yes-but the threat has been greatly exaggerated. As the real numbers make clear, Arab population growth is not an overwhelming force that is destined, sooner or later, to relegate the Jews to minority status. On the contrary: With a greater understanding of demography and the specific forces that drive it, Israeli policymakers can develop a range of choices to affect the long-term demographic trends in the region-from the encouragement of Jewish immigration to the fostering of economic and social equality between Israel’s Jewish and Arab citizens. More important, Israel must realize that it has time, demographically speaking, to evaluate these choices, and to make the right decisions.

If Zimmerman and his group is right, this is one of the very rare issues where time is actual on Israel's side. It would also be an opportunity for the US and Europe to think through the implications of the report for their policy of support for the Palestinian Arabs and the PA. The question remains whether Zimmerman's report--and implications--will be accepted.

Haaretz concludes, "Now the findings can be discussed, challenged or rejected - but to ignore them would be folly."

Crossposted at Israpundit

Technorati Tag: Israel and Palestinians and Demographics and US and Ros-Lehtinen .

Palestinian Demographic Timebomb Affects More Than Just Israel

[Note: I made a small change in the title of the post (see here). Because Blogger creates the link to the post based on the title, I had to create a separate post so that any links out in the blogosphere to this post would still have somewhere to go to. Sorry for any confusion]

The issue of demographics in Israel used to be a vague, abstract, gnawing issue. In 2002, Ben Wattenberg wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal that Israel needn't worry about a population implosion. But the demographics problem continued to be discussed--until it became an issue for 2 concrete calls for action in 2 different countries.

On the one hand, the demographic time bomb of the growing Palestinian Arab population was one of the reasons given to justify the need for the Disengagement. On the other hand the findings of American Researchers Bennett Zimmerman, Roberta Seid, and Michael Wise--which seem to indicate that the numbers for the Arab population in Gaza and the West Bank have been highly inflated, while Jewish births and immigration forecasts are underestimated--found their way to the US Congress.

These findings, supported in part by the Palestinian Arabs themselves,were presented in March to the Middle East Subcommittee of the House International Relations Committee, chaired by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the Republican Congresswoman of Florida--who in January proposed legislation, which would cut American funding to both the PA and the UN, designate the PA a "terrorist sanctuary," and close down some of the PA offices in the US, in order to reduce Palestinian-American diplomatic ties.

But the issue of Palestinian demographics was relevant to the committee for a different reason. The importance of the Zimmerman report for the US, as noted by World Net Daily, is that

almost $3 billion in United States taxpayer funds may have been provided as aid to the Palestinians in part based on fraudulent data.

"American tax dollars and other international humanitarian aid have been based on inflated population numbers which have been accepted without question by governments and aid agencies. Our researchers pointed out that money has been spent to help Palestinians who were double-counted, never born or not present in the West Bank and Gaza," Bennet Zimmerman, head of the new study, titled "Arab Population in the West Bank and Gaza," told WND.

Of course, one could assume that Europe might be interested in the possibility that the Palestinians may have swindled them as well.

In an article in the Summer 5766/2006 issue of Azure entitle Voodoo Demographics, Zimmerman, Seid and Weiss lay out all the ways the Palestinian Arab population was miscounted:

In sum: By double-counting the Jerusalem Arabs and counting Arabs living abroad, the Palestinians inflated their base data for 1997 by 648,000. By predicting unrealistically high rates of natural population growth, the number was inflated by an additional 276,000; and by falsely predicting massive immigration to Gaza and the West Bank, and ignoring the significant net emigration of Palestinians from the territories, the PCBS[Palestine Central Bureau of Statistics] further inflated the numbers by another 415,000. If we add these figures together, by 2004 the PCBS figures had managed to inflate the population in the West Bank and Gaza by some 1.34 million people-more than 50 percent. When the pcbs’ numerous errors are corrected, the Palestinian Arab population for Gaza and the West Bank drops to 2.49 million people, with 1.42 million in the West Bank and 1.07 million in Gaza in mid-2004.

Now, in answer to criticism that their results were given in the form of a presentation instead of actual published research, in February the group published an academic research paper through Bar-Ilan's Begin-Sadat Center Center for Strategic Research--allowing the findings to be properly analyzed. It can be downloaded as a PDF from the Bar Ilan University website.

One possible weakness of the report is that for their prediction for 2025, the group has left their research data for Gaza out of their calculations because, as they note elsewhere in their article Gaza "is no longer under any kind of Israeli rule, and therefore is of questionable relevance when speaking of a demographic threat" Thus, according to their prediction, as Haaretz puts it:

7.5 million Jews will be living in Israel and the West Bank then, constituting 63 percent of the population, as compared to 4.45 million Arabs (of these, 2.25 million in the West Bank), or 37 percent of the population. In other words, for every Arab, there will be two Jews. The population in Israel proper will be 77 percent Jews and 23 percent Arabs - not much different from today.

But the bottom line question remains whether Israel is free and clear of the demographic time bomb that was calculated into the considerations for Sharon's Disengagement and for Olmert's Convergence Plan. In their article, they address this point:

Do the Jews of Israel face a demographic threat? The answer is still a qualified yes-but the threat has been greatly exaggerated. As the real numbers make clear, Arab population growth is not an overwhelming force that is destined, sooner or later, to relegate the Jews to minority status. On the contrary: With a greater understanding of demography and the specific forces that drive it, Israeli policymakers can develop a range of choices to affect the long-term demographic trends in the region-from the encouragement of Jewish immigration to the fostering of economic and social equality between Israel’s Jewish and Arab citizens. More important, Israel must realize that it has time, demographically speaking, to evaluate these choices, and to make the right decisions.

If Zimmerman and his group is right, this is one of the very rare issues where time is actual on Israel's side. The question remains whether Zimmerman's report--and implications--will be accepted.

Haaretz concludes, "Now the findings can be discussed, challenged or rejected - but to ignore them would be folly."

Technorati Tag: Israel and Palestinians and Demographics and US and Ros-Lehtinen .

More On Gaza Beach

On June 16, there was a request for a UN probe:

UN observer in Palestine, Riyadh Mansour, submitted a request to UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, to order an international probe in the circumstances linked to the massacre of seven Palestinian family members on a Gaza beach last week.

It is to be noted that member states in the Arab League, Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) and Non-aligned Movement (NAM) supported the Palestinian demand. Annan promised me to study the demand which needs Israeli approval, Mansour said, adding that he asked the Israeli leadership to forward an exhaustive report to the UN on the Gaza beach incident. [emphasis added]

The OIC reaction is an interesting contrast to the complete failure of the OIC to respond to their fellow Moslems when Russia invaded Afghanistan in 1979:

According to Bernard Lewis, in The Crisis of Islam:

Two member states, South Yemen and Syria, boycotted the meeting; Libya's delegate delivered a violent attack on the USA, while the representative of the PLO, a full member of the OIC, abstained from voting on the anti-Soviet resolution and submitted his reservations in writing.

...But it was left to the United States to organize, with some success, an Islamic counterattack to Soviet imperialism in Afghanistan. The OIC did little to help the Afghans...[p 91-92]

The Arab League, for its part, failed to condemn the Sudanese government’s policies in Darfur at their summit meeting in Khartoum in March 28-29 this year. I don't know anything about NAM.

Anyway, when Olmert rejected any international inquiry on Sunday into the incident, he was responding to the UN.

This is just as well, considering for example what happened when Israel agreed to let the Hague look into legality of the Security Fence:

Buried deep in the text of its opinion is a bombshell that purports to radically rewrite the rules of international law governing the inherent right of states to defend themselves and their citizens.

The ICJ recognises that this right is enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter. But the ICJ then says that this right is limited to self-defence in the case of armed attack "by one state against another state". That limitation does not appear anywhere in the text of Article 51 itself. Article 51 recognises that states have an inherent right of self-defence "if an armed attack occurs". It does not say that the armed attack must have been carried out by, or be attributable to, another state. [emphasis added]

This would impact the fight against international terrorism as well as affecting Israel's options if the PA claims (as it does) that it has no control over the terrorist attacks being launched against Israel. I don't know how much weight this decision by the ICJ actually has.

Who knows what kind of damage the UN could cause Israel if it was placed in a position of authority over Israeli actions.

Meanwhile, it is being reported that Israeli intelligence believes that Hamas increased tensions in the area--even before the Gaza beach incident--in order to head of Abbas' referendum. Apparently, someone forgot to tell Hamas that the referendum really has nothing to do with peace and recognition of Israel. According to the same article, Hamas may also intend to prevent Olmert from carrying out his Convergence Plan--whatever form it may take--but if it is carried out, then Hamas can again take credit.

Also, the Telegraph is reporting on the repurcussions of the shrapnel being recovered from the bodies of Palestinians Arab bodies. The difference is that they are reporting that the shrapnel recovered by Palestinian doctors shows it came from the Israelis, according to Marc Garlasco's examination. Look's like that will offset Israel's discovery that the shrapnel they recovered indicated it did not come from Israeli ordnance, the points raised by the German newspaper Sued Deutsche.

See also: Hurray For Pallywood--At Gaza Beach (June 19)
See also: Human Rights Watch / Garlasco Admit Israel Not Responsible (Updated) (June 20)
See also: Will Israel Go To The Videotape? (June 26)

Crossposted at Israpundit

Technorati Tag: Israel and Gaza and Hadil Ghalia and Marc Garlasco.

Olmert's Divergence From Convergence

According to Haaretz, PM drafting alternative to convergence plan, based on Olmert's failure to gather any international support for the Convergence Plane, he is going to repackage it and try again:

In light of the international opposition to further unilateral steps by
Israel, the government has begun to draft an alternative plan that would
essentially convert Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's unilateral convergence plan
into a bilateral move carried out in conjunction with Palestinian Authority
Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

According to the plan now being drafted by the Prime Minister's Office and
the Foreign Ministry, Israel would propose to Abbas that they reach an
agreement to establish a Palestinian state with provisional borders in Gaza
plus about 90 percent of the West Bank. The provisional border in the West
Bank would match the route of the separation fence, with one exception:
Israel would retain security control over the Jordan Valley.

In this way, Israel hopes to present the convergence plan as an
implementation of Phase II of the road map peace plan, thereby acceding to
the demands of the United States, Jordan, Egypt and others that Israel
resume negotiations with the PA under the road map.

Haaretz is nice enougth to point out that going to Phase II means bypassing Phase I which was never fulfilled--you remember, the part about stopping the terrorism.

Another problem--on the one hand:

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni confirmed to Haaretz that she told senior
ministry officials last week that "currently, Abbas is not a partner for a
final-status agreement, but he could be a partner for other arrangements, on the basis of the road map's phased process."...One participant in this meeting said that Livni spoke explicitly about an agreement to establish a Palestinian state with provisional borders. [emphasis added]

This of course requires Abbas to be thinking along similar lines. As it so happens, Abbas seems to be thinking along totally opposite lines:

Prior to Hamas's rise to power in the PA, Abbas rejected the idea of a state
with provisional borders, demanding immediate talks on a final-status
agreement instead.

An interesting contradiction:

However, Washington backed Israel's stance in favor of a provisional state, and Jerusalem expects that the U.S. will pressure Abbas to change his position....Israel could bypass Hamas and implement this program in conjunction with Abbas, thereby bolstering his status.

It's not clear how forcing Abbas into taking a position that he publicly opposed is going to bolster his status, but hope springs eternal.

IMRA is critical of the new packaging:

PM drafting alternative to convergence plan [strip Road Map of requirement for Palestinian compliance?]

The fundamental difference between withdrawal within the framework of
the Road Map and Olmert's proposed retreat is that Israel wants to retreat
while leaving open the question as to what happens in the void the retreat
creates.

It would appear that the "solution" the Olmert team is working on is to
strip the Road Map of any requirement for Palestinian compliance.

This way Israel will retreat and face a sovereign entity filling the void -
with all the Palestinian terror infrastructure intact. ready for the next
round of war.

"Israel would retain security control over the Jordan Valley" is the same
wording that PM Sharon's team first used to describe the original Gaza
retreat plan for controlling the Philadelphi Corridor after the retreat.
Ultimately Israel never held the line.

Of course, another thing you won't find mentioned in connection with the Road Map are Sharon's 14 Reservations, which were ignored anyway--by Sharon as well--almost as soon as they were drawn up. Here are some of them:

1. Both at the commencement of, and during the process, and as a condition to its continuance, calm will be maintained...

2. Full performance will be a condition for progress between phases and for progress within phases. The first condition for progress will be the complete cessation of terror, violence and incitement...

5. The character of the provisional Palestinian state will be determined through negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and Israel. The provisional state will have provisional borders and certain aspects of sovereignty, be fully demilitarized with no military forces, but only with police and internal security forces of limited scope and armaments...

6. In connection to both the introductory statements and the final settlement, declared references must be made to Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state and to the waiver of any right of return for Palestinian refugees to the State of Israel.

14. Arab states will assist the process through the condemnation of terrorist activity.

Don't look for any of these points to be raised--who would take them seriously?

Olmert's is not willing to accept that sometimes a bad idea really is just a bad idea.

Crossposted at Israpundit

Technorati Tag: Israel and Olmert and Road Map and Convergence Plan.

Friends Don`t Let Friends Appease Terrorists

Maybe the light at the end of the tunnel is not an oncoming train--or if it is, at least someone may finally be applying the brakes.

In Tough Love From Israel's Friends, Jeff Jacoby writes about friends of Israel that are speaking out forcefully--against what she is doing. He writes about the Center for Security Policy, a Washington think tank. After years of supporting Israel's right to defend itself against her enemies, they have come out with a new television ad (view here) that says Israel's withdrawal from Southern Lebanon and Gaza has played into the hands of terrorists and Olmert's Convergence Plan will do more of the same--"for Israel and for us."

Jacoby quotes Joseph Farah's article, I give up on Israel, which describes Olmert's plan as a "national retreat," and "appeasement of the global jihad," and the Disengagement as an "unmitigated disaster."

Jacoby also quotes an article from the Wall Street Journal by former CIA director James Woolsey that a West Bank Terrorist State, resulting from Olmert's Convergence Plan would be a threat to Jordan as well as Israel--and "Israeli concessions will also make the US look weak."

And that is the key to the tough love that Jacoby writes about--the actions that Israel is ready to take, and have taken, affect the US as well.

Others have noted this new realization as well. Back in April, IMRA quoted from an article in Geostratetgy-Direct (subscription required) that Bush has mixed feelings about Olmert and Sharon. While Israel has cooperated with the US:

At the same time, Bush and some of his aides have been quietly concerned over the image of Israel as a country ready to withdraw in the face of terrorism. Privately, leading aides and strategists believe that Israel's hesitancy to fight Hamas, Hizbullah and other terrorist groups could encourage Al Qaida and those sworn to defeat the United States. They also see Israel's failure to defeat Palestinian insurgents as encouraging Iran's belligerency.

With all of this, there might be good news as well. That is what David Bedein says in an interview with A7 Radio's "Weekend Edition" with Tamar Yonah and Malkah Fleisher

Here is a short excerpt of the interview (3.40 minutes):

In the interview, Bedein claims that for Canada and the US, the days of appeasement are over. They want Israel to be strong. Hamas coming to power back in January was a wake-up call to Western intelligence agencies. There is an expectation both in the US and Canada that Israel is going to find a way to resist the Palestinian Authority's attempt to destroy her and the West. The agenda is to stand strong, and Olmert is not the kind of leader they are looking for.

Bedein is Bureau Chief of the Israel Resource News Agency, which has recent articles that hint at this change in attitude. There is an article about Canada--where Bedein spoke with Jason Kenney, the prime minister's parliamentary secretary about measures Canada can take to reform the UNRWA--and an article about the US, where there is an amendment in the works that would condition U.S. funding of UNRWA on an independent audit.

David Bedein writes:

Marvin and Bernard Kalb, in their seminal book, "Kissinger", written in 1976, report that in 1968 the new Israeli ambassador and recently retired Israeli commander in chief, Yitzhak Rabin, accompanied US presidential candidate Richard Nixon to view the Golan Heights, recently captured from the Syrians.

Peering down from Syrian gun positions that were trained on the farmers in Israel's Hula Valley, Nixon observed that, "If I were an Israeli, I would never give up the Golan". Rabin smiled from ear to ear. "Mr. Rabin, what I said was that 'if I was an Israeli'. I am not an Israeli".

As long as Israel's security alone was the issue, the US looked towards it's own concerns first and not necessarily with Israel's best interests at heart. But now there is a conflation of interests, even the survival, of the West and Israel, and if Bedein is correct, the US and Israel may never have been more allies than now.

Crossposted at Israpundit

Technorati Tags: Israel, Olmert, Disengagement, US and UNRWA and Hamas and Palestinians and Terrorism.

Abbas Threatens Hamas With Referendum For Peace

According to Arutz Sheva:

PA President Mahmoud Abbas has given PA Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh an ultimatum: Accept a deal for borders within the ’67 line or the issue goes to a general referendum.

On the one hand Haniyeh is claiming that Olmert's visit to the US was a great success and that the Convergence Plan was approved by Bush:

"Israel is trying to set up a country with a Jewish majority and preserve Jerusalem as its capital,” he told PA legislators. "This shows the Israeli government wants to keep the occupation. Unfortunately, the Americans are on Israel’s side.

Haniyeh continues to boast about the success of the terrorist attacks on Israel.

On the other hand, Abbas seems to be pushing towards serious talks that are about more than just talking:

"Are slogans enough to feed the hungry?" Abbas demanded of the PA parliament. "We must stop with the slogans and start dealing with reality. We must stop dreaming and accept what we can take now. Let us not speak of dreams. Let us take the Palestinian state on the ’67 borders," he stated.

Abbas insisted that the majority of PA Arabs are willing to accept the deal. "There is a national consensus on this," he said, adding that the current infighting between Fatah and Hamas is simply wasting time.

After all the hondling following the Road Map and squeezing concessions--and the Disengagement--out of Israel:

o Is Abbas serious about peace this time?
o Even if he is, does he have what it takes to pull it off?
o Is Hamas going to go along with this?
o If it doesn't will a real civil war break out
o Why is it that Abbas is willing to make a referendum, but Sharon wouldn't and Olmert won't

Technorati Tag: Israel and Palestinians and Hamas and Fatah and Abbas and Haniyeh.

You Know Things Are Tough When The Arabs Boycott The Palestinians

And it's even worse when Arabs threaten to boycott the Arabs who are boycotting Palestinian Arabs.

Haaretz was reporting on May 15 that:

The prominent and popular Islamic scholar Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi threatened on Thursday to issue a religious edict mandating a boycott of Arab and Islamic banks that refuse to transfer monetary aid to the Palestinians. This was the desperate cry of a cleric watching a nearly complete Arab boycott in operation, this time not against Israel, but against Palestine.

Even granting that it was reported even earlier that the US was giving in to pressure to provide humanitarian aid to Palestinian Arabas, the Haaretz article claims that what makes the boycott against Hamas work is not the US threat--which was ineffective in the past in preventing European and Arab countries from aiding Saddam Hussein or Muammar Gadhafi--rather it is the Arab attitude towards Hamas itself:

The difference is that Hamas is now perceived as unwilling to cooperate with the official Arab position adopted at the Beirut summit - the Arab League resolution adopting the two-state principle and the 1967 borders. Arab states, particularly Egypt and Saudi Arabia, are demanding a greater effort from Hamas. They are not prepared to accept the possibility that the movement now leading the country that represents Arab unity might rebel against an Arab decision. The "loss" of Palestine into radical religious hands, especially with Iraq inching out of the Arab framework, therefore necessitates restraining action that will bind Hamas's Palestine to the Arab ranks.

Meanwhile, though the US has expressed a willingness to go along with the idea of sending aid--bypassing Hamas--to the PA for humanitarian needs, this also may not be such a clear-cut decision. Fatah and Hamas attacking each other and Al Qaeda on the scene cannot be making the US eager to invest more money into the bottomless pit known as the PA. One US official is quoted as saying:

"If Hamas has money to finance its people, who are riding about in cars and brandishing rifles, it should use it to pay teachers and doctors," he said. "Who's paying for their gas?"

"The Hamas government is the one that ought to take care of its workers," he continued. "We have never paid the salaries of Palestinian Authority employees, and there is no reason for us to do so now."

Meanwhile, the boycott of Hamas is taking a toll. Some Palestinian Arabs are losing faith in Hamas. In The Other Side of the Green Line, Michael Totten interviews some Palestinian Arabs:

“The economy here looks a lot better than I expected,” I said to Sufian.

“It was pretty good until Hamas was elected,” he said. “But look in the stores. Notice there are no people in them. The only things people are buying are food and cigarettes. Only the basics. They are afraid to spend money if they have it.”

-----

“Who did you vote for?” I said.

“I voted for Fatah,” he said. “I’m not affiliated with them. They are just a good party to run things. I don’t think Hamas is ready for power. In some things I agree with Fatah, in some things I don’t. Even though they are corrupt, at least we had money. People are boycotting Hamas so now we are poor. We anticipate things will eventually get better, but we don’t have time.”

-----

“What has changed since Hamas came to power?” I said.

“Business,” he said. “The economy dropped down dramatically. Without industry they cannot boost the economy. We import everything from China. We support Chinese workers. We need our own industry.”

If the US has what it takes to at least not free up all funds to Hamas, combined with the fear in the Arab world of what Hamas might do by instituting Sharia--maybe something can be accomplished.

But don't hold your breath. Apparently besides the White House being skittish on Olmert's 'Convergence Plan,' they are planning on giving Olmert some homework to do:

The administration is also very concerned by the deteriorating situation in the territories and fear that it could eventually cause the PA to collapse, which Washington views as highly undesirable. Administration officials therefore plan to insist that Olmert present ideas on how to prevent the PA from degenerating into total chaos.

After the US took a hands-off attitude toward bringing the Palestinian Arabs to Democracy, it is left to Israel to deal with the mess.

Israel never gets a breather.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Hamas and Olmert and Totten.

Links To Wake Up To On Thursday Morning

The week is just over half over and so far I've had to answer my 6 year old daughter's questions:
o Why she does not get presents on Mother's Day when Imma and Bubby do
o Is she a teenager

It's all downhill from here.

Meanwhile, here are some links.

AbbaGav writes about Superland, gravity and bravery.

Adloyada describes how to free Alaa by googlebombing. (Egypt)

A Simple Jew has just finished Maseches Megillah and has started Masesches Taanis

The Astute Blogger has a post on the Pope's Fatwa that wasn't

Biur Chametz writes about the uncovering of the historical Lag B'Omer

ConservaJew disagrees.

Crossing The Rubicon has found an op-ed in the Telegraph opposed to funding Hamas

Elder of Ziyon thanks Iran for a history lesson that they know nothing of.

Elie's Expositions: May 16th marks one year since his son Aaron passed away.

Erica's Blog writes about a friend's Chabad humor

The Hashmonean writes on how the former PA Security Funds Manager confirms that Arafat directly funded terrorism.

Heichal HaNegina writes about Lev HaOmer

The Ignoble Experiment, aka Live Dangerously! has taken her last final

I'm Haaretz, Ph.D. had an un-Happy Mother's Day

Israel Perspectives shares Israeli celebrity, Yair Lapid's answer on why he stays in Israel.

Israel Matzav translates an article on Pere' statement that Consolidation in the West Bank will take place during the coming year

Jack's Shack asks how did you come up with your name for your blog--and gets 80 answers.

Judeopundit has Linkim and notes the ACLU stand on terrorism

Letters of Thought waxes philosophical in Vilna.

Life-Of-Rubin on the coverage of the murder of Daniel Wultz

me-ander has a reminder that the 6th Kosher Cooking Carnival is not limited only to recipes

Mirty's Place writes about change.

The Muqata received a video invitation to a bris.

Ocean Guy: Somewhere on A1A writes about a terrorist's website.

On the Contrary: Don’s Mideast Musings post's his response to a question about a 'Palestinian Holocaust'.

Perspectives of a Nomad provides an approach towards peace between Israelis and Palestinians

Psycho Toddler and Dr. Bean sing their classic single "I Got Your Blog"

SerandEz has links and writes about the New York Magazine article

Shiloh Musings sees the future of Israel resting on the shoulders of the women

Simply Jews writes about the demand for better cellphone service in Gaza

Smooth Stone rebuts the comparison of Israel with South Africa

Soccer Dad has a new feature: Insta-pudding

Treppenwitz writes about the value of saying hello

Meryl Yourish writes about pulling the plug on 'Convergence'

WestBankBlog writes about why she made Aliyah.


Technorati Tag: Blogs and Israel and Judaism.

Does Olmert Have The Support Of The Media?

The Jerusalem Post reports that Olmert said on Sunday that he will be quick to redraw Israel's borders in the West Bank as part of his "convergence plan" now that it is clear that there is no peace partner to talk to after Hamas has defended the terrorist attack that killed 9 Israelis in Tel Aviv. Apparently Olmert finds support for Disengagement from the West Bank from The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Guardian.

According to the Jerusalem Post, Olmert:

pointed to editorials that appeared in The New York Times, The Washington Post and even in Britain's Guardian, which he characterized "as Left as can be," that praised "the Israeli position and essentially said it has been proven that Israel does not have a partner and that this will necessarily lead to unilateral Israeli steps." [emphasis added]

True, The Times and The Post are negative on Hamas--see the Honest Reporting Communique on this point--but there is a difference between the media saying that Olmert is going to take unilateral steps and actually supporting the necessity those steps.

What The New York Times actually said was:

Hamas's support for terrorism encourages Mr. Olmert's strategy of a unilateral separation from the Palestinian people. It's a sure bet that if Israel carries out this separation without input from the Palestinians — as it is now doing — the Palestinians will not end up with enough land for a viable state.

This is nothing new--it is simply stating the fact that Olmert wants to take unilateral steps and what the result will likely be on a future Palestinian State.

The Washington Post, on the other hand, does not even mention Olmert. The editorial notes that "Hamas's position will also justify tough new measures by Israel, which cannot be expected to accept a neighboring government's open embrace of suicide bombers who attack its cities. "--but those 'tough new measures' have nothing to due with redrawing borders:

The Israeli army already wages a ruthless but narrowly targeted war against Islamic Jihad and has killed a score of its members in the past several months while arresting hundreds of others. A separate campaign of artillery barrages and airstrikes is aimed at suppressing rocket launches into Israel from the Gaza Strip, which are being carried out by several Palestinian factions. Yesterday the Israeli cabinet reportedly decided to refrain from renewing military action against Hamas itself. But if more suicide bombers succeed in the coming days and weeks with Hamas's support, this restraint will surely be abandoned.

This contrasts with the Times that praises Olmert for "taking the high road" in not retaliating, but instead revoking the residency permits of Hamas officials in East Jerusalem, conducting raids in the West Bank to make arrests, and conducting a police crackdown on the smuggling of Palestinians into Israel--no praise for any unilateral action.

And what about The Guardian? I don't know what editorial Olmert is pointing to as condemning Hamas and accepting unilateral action as inevitable, but if the Guardian is saying it, it is not with a unanimous voice. From April 19, there is an article entitled "Last chance for two states: Negotiation rather than unilateralism is the way out of the spiralling Israeli-Palestinian crisis." Another article is no better, harsher on Israel than on Hamas:

The Palestinian Authority chairman, Mahmoud Abbas, said violence was against Palestinian interests and urged the international community to encourage peace negotiations "to stop the grave deterioration the region is witnessing".

But Israel seized on the Hamas statement, even though it has suspended its attacks against Israel and said it would not carry out suicide attacks in the future. Ra'anan Gissin, a spokesman for Mr Olmert, said: "This Palestinian Authority, which has clearly defined itself as a terrorist entity, has tried to instigate terrorist support more than the previous one did, and we will act accordingly."[emphasis added]

Olmert may yet be justified in believing that world governments as a whole may yet side with Israel against Hamas, but if he thinks that these newspapers are the tea leaves that reveal the coming approval of world opinion--he's better off reading blogs instead.

More importantly, as Powerline points out:

What really matters is whether Israel has a true peace partner, not whether "foreign ministries around the world" think it does. If Israel lacks such a partner, as is surely the case, it must act accordingly regardless of what various foreign ministries and editorial writers believe. To be sure, Israel must also worry about how the Bush administration views things, but only to that limited extent should the opinions of foreigners matter.

It's a bad sign that Olmert thinks otherwise, and a terrible sign that he's interested in what liberal editorial writers at the Times, Post, and Guardian are saying.

Technorati Tag: Israel and Olmert and Hamas and West Bank and Disengagement.

Links for a Late Wednesday, Early Thursday

Some posts to point to before going to bed. This is going to cover for this week and next...and the one after that. I hope.

Here they are:

AbbaGav thinks he has a Nobel Peace Prize in his future.

Adloyada writes about Passover delights from Yiddishland

A Simple Jew writes about the Lesson of the Simple Son

Boker Tov, Boulder notes that Zarqawi sees HAMAS as weak, threatens attacks

Crossing the Rubicon gives a roundup of Israel news

Elder of Ziyon notes the rich Arab response to the Hamas request for increased funding.

It is almost a year now that Elie's Expositions' son passed away and he writes about Compression, Depression, and Expression

The Hashmonean notes that Hamas is broke

Israel Perspectives has some quick takes on current events

Israel Matzav catches Amira Hass channeling Meir Kahane

Jack's Shack is looking for feedback to questions about your blogroll

Life of Rubin has a number of posts about the Borough Park riots

Judeopundit has a list of interesting links

Me-ander gives the recipe to a Pesach breakfast favorite

Mere Rhetoric writes about the iPod-ization of American Judaism

Mirty's Place provides the link that will take you directly to the source of all evil

The Modern Orthodox Woman writes about Divrei Torah by Women in the Synagogue

Perspectives of a Nomad compares Iran's recent 'moves' to a chess game

Psycho Toddler does a mean imitation of Sean Connery

SerandEz has a link roundup for April 5

Shiloh Musings has some post-election...musings

Smoothstone notes what over 900 Israelis have in common.

Soccer Dad covers some of the most recent response to the "Israel lobby' paper

The Sunken Synagogue writes about post-election machinations

Treppenwitz writes about perception and prejudice

Meryl Yourish writes about the Civil Rights Act being amended to include Anti-Semitism

WestBankblog writes about an unusual mating dance

Why Palestinians Get It Wrong writes about a World Bank report that is not optimistic about Palestinian prospects


Technorati Tag: Blogs and Israel and Judaism.