By Yossi Melman, Haaretz Correspondent
The standard assumption is that a military attack by the United States or Israel to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons would be disastrous for the attackers, and would threaten the stability of the entire Middle East.
Various experts outline doomsday scenarios for such an occurrence, and warn especially of Iran's harsh reaction. Fearing the reaction of the ayatollahs has a paralyzing effect. Even before the first shot has been fired, Iran can credit itself with a success. It created an image of an omnipotent country that will not hesitate to use its power to respond and avenge a military operation against it. This is an impressive psychological achievement.
But a new paper, to be published this month in the U.S. by two well-known experts on the subject, sketches a different and more complex picture. The paper is "The Last Resort," written by Patrick Clawson and Michael Eisenstadt of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. The main point, notes Dr. Clawson in an interview with Haaretz, is that the success or failure of a military attack depends on many variables, and not just the degree of damage the attack would cause.
Advertisement
What are these variables?
The type of weapons chosen for the attack - will nuclear or conventional weapons be used? Who attacks - the U.S. or Israel? Will the attack cause serious collateral damage to the surroundings, that is causing a lot of civilian casualties? Will only the nuclear sites be attacked, or other regime targets? After the attack, will President Ahmadinejad announce Iran's departure from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty? If the attack completely destroys Iran's nuclear program that is one thing, but if it does not, that is a different story. Then Iran will be able to continue to develop its nuclear program, and the world will no longer care about that. In short, this is subject that is dependent on many variables.
Nevertheless, what would be deemed a success?
If the attack does destroy the nuclear facilities, and it leads to a broad consensus in Iran that nuclear weapons are dangerous for the future of the regime or the nation. In other words, success or failure is determined by the political result of the military attack. The primary objective of the military option has to be to convince Iran to cease its nuclear program, that it's not worthwhile to continue. Destroying the nuclear facilities is not an end in and of itself; it is merely a means to an end. And therefore it is necessary to create the political conditions that will increase the chances for the success of the attack.
And what will be a possible result of an Israeli attack?
Again, my answer is that it depends. Israel has to create the circumstances in which world public opinion will understand Israel and its motives, even if it regrets the attack.
That's more or less what happened with the attack against the nuclear facility in Syria?
Yes, it is quite similar. Israel benefited from President Assad's hostile attitude to the world, and therefore the international community showed understanding of the Israeli air force's attack. Israel did not have to do much because Assad did the job for it. In this respect, Israel also benefits from Ahmadinejad and his statements. They help Israel present its position to the world and explain the threat it faces.
Do you share the sweeping assessment of most experts that Iran's reaction if attacked will be harsh and painful?
No. Iran's record when it comes to its reactions in the past to attacks against it, or its important interests, is mixed. When the Taliban assumed power in Afghanistan and persecuted the Shi'ite minority there, Iran mobilized military forces on the border and threatened to respond, but in the end it did nothing. The same occurred when the U.S. shot down an Iranian passenger airline in 1988: Iran threatened to avenge the incident, but in the end the exact opposite happened. Not only did Iran not respond, but also the incident hastened its decision to agree to a cease-fire in the war with Iraq for fear that the U.S. was about to join the war on Saddam Hussein's side.
In another incident during the war, Iranian boats attacked an American naval force that set out to mine the Gulf. The U.S. did not expect Iran to react, and was surprised. This did not stop it from sinking half of the Iranian fleet in response.
Iran has lately been threatening that if it is attacked it will close the Straits of Hormuz and block the flow of oil, and thereby damage the world economy. But this is a problematic threat, since it would also affect Iran's friends and supporters, such as China and India. I have no doubt that in such a case, they would be angry at Iran.
But most experts estimate that in the event of an Israeli attack, the Iranians will respond with force and launch Shihab missiles at Israel.
It is possible, but first, the Shihab missiles are not considered particularly reliable. Iran deploys them without having done hardly any significant tests. Second, the Shihab's guidance system is not very accurate. The missile's range of accuracy is up to a kilometer. And finally, Israel's aerial defense system - the Arrow missiles would certainly intercept quite a few Shihab missiles. Moreover, Iran's firing missiles at Israel would enable Israel to respond in a decisive manner.
And what about Hezbollah? They will certainly mobilize to help Iran and respond against Israel.
There is no guarantee that Hezbollah will react automatically. They will make their considerations on the basis of their interests, as they understand them. In Hezbollah, they are very aware of Israel's strength, and of the harsh reaction that may result if Hezbollah attacks.
In other words, you're basically saying that things are not as they seem? That Iran is like a dog whose bark is worse than his bite?
There's something to that. My assessment is that contrary to the impression that has been formed, Iran's options for responding are limited and weak.
And this is what I say...
First off it's interesting to read the theoretical hypotheses of those working in the strategic military institutes.
There are several factors to consider that have not been pointed out in this argument:
Never before has President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and Iranian leadership been less concerned about world opinion vis-a-vis his nuclear proliferation strategy
Never before has Iran been the most powerful military force in the Middle East
Never before has Iran been in a more favorable military position - given American and world fatigue for Middle East wars (following from several years of bloodshed and thousands of casualties in Iraq)
Never before has Iran faced the prospect of an ultra-liberal American President - the likes of which (assuming Barack Obama wins) is more likely to favor appeasement than military action
Never before has Iran commanded so much power in the Middle East in its aggression and rhetoric against Israel. This can be seen with continuing support and training for Hamas operatives and other militants in Gaza; financial support for families of suicide bombers and weapons and financing for Hizballah in Lebanon.
Never before has Iran had access to Nuclear weapons-grade material
Now, things are a little different.
Iran has been estimated to have nuclear-ready bomb material within 1-3 years.
Iranian leadership has repeatedly called for Israel to be wiped off the face of the map.
Iranian leadership flatly denies or at best questions the accuracy of Holocaust reports.
Iranian leadership likened Israel to a rotting corpse (on the eve of Israel's 60th birthday) and promised that it would die.
Iran has been conducting large-scale military operations across it's vast expanses. Huge displays of its military might were made public.
Iran purchased the latest anti-aircraft defense systems from Russia to guard its Nuclear Facility from an enemy attack.
Iran is working feverishly - against UN & IAEA recommendations in fast-tracking its nuclear program.
Iran is looking to purchase ICBMs that are capable of avoiding detection by radar and satellites. Add this fact to the likelihood of potential nuclear warheads and it becomes clear that Iran is intent on striking first and wreaking absolute havoc - so much so that its enemies would be unable to respond.
Iran has defied every single UN resolution requesting it to halt its uranium enrichment program.
Iran does not need nuclear power - it has one of the world's largest supplies of petroleum.
Iran recently apprehended British sailors in international waters and held the world to ransom with their demands that Britain apologize for the supposed incursion.
Given the facts, and we must take history into account, the situation is indeed grave.
President George W. Bush is fast coming to the end of his term. A likely successor in Barack Obama will initially prove too soft to Iran - given Obama's severe short-sightedness in foreign affairs. Barack Obama has one slogan - Change - but that counts for precious little if the change is going to tilt the balance of power in the world in favour of radical Islamic states.
As potential leader of the free world, it is not only Obama's world duty to protect and to preserve the principles of justice and democracy - it is his duty to enforce them. Diplomacy with terrorist states is appeasement. Barack Obama is too self-absorbed in fancy ego-aggrandizement to take criticism of his ill-informed; misguided world politics. What the world demands of America is RealPolitik.
If however John McCain assumes the Presidency then President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad and Iran's military dictatorship will face severe recriminations from a powerful Western democracy and its allies.
Either way a US congress of Republicans and Democrats - regardless of who the President is - will not allow a rogue Iran - armed with Nuclear warheads - to threaten the security of the world.
The European Union is exerting tremendous political and economic pressure on Iran to end its enrichment objectives. This has had a minimal effect. Iran has been ratcheting up its anti-Israel slander with increasing alacrity.
This poses the question: will military action incur severe reprisals by Iran?
The short answer - yes.
Whether it is Israel that surprises Iran or a western coalition, Israel will in all likelihood suffer a barrage of missile strikes - the likes of which will make the 2006 2nd Lebanon War look like a walk in the park.
This means that it is necessary to exert maximum diplomatic and economic pressure on Iran. The country needs to be completely isolated from other nations. It needs to feel the isolation. This can be done through a strong multilateral initiative comprising Russia; China; EU; USA; Canada and Australasia. In the face of such sanctions, Iran may consider - being rational - halting enrichment.
If however international pressure is unable to end enrichment in Iran within a short time, then military action must come to pass. There simply is no alternative. The world cannot allow a nuclear armed Iran to threaten another state with extinction. The world cannot allow the leading sponsor of terror to be armed with nuclear weapons.
The world must act and sacrifices will have to be made - it is inevitable that sacrifices will have to be made - but the alternative of inaction will yield grave consequences.
May 22, 2008
May 20, 2008
The new Israel with the problems of old
The State of Israel has come under immense scrutiny since its inception in 1948. However in spite of these difficulties - 7 wars and 7 victories - Israel stands firm. The threat of war hangs over Israel at every juncture; peace is as fragile a concept as always - yet the Israeli people stand firm. At a time where Israel's enemies are planning the ultimate affront - in nuclear war - Israel has a duty to remain strong.
An article written in www.theherald.co.za recently captures the essence of Israel's existence; its desire to live in peace the challenges confronting the Jewish State.
60 years after founding, no peace for Israel
SIXTY years after the declaration of independence as a sovereign Jewish state on May 14, 1948, Israel has not yet found peace (shalom).
Judaism is twice as old as Christianity and three times older than Islam – yet there are 82 Christian countries, 56 Muslim countries and only one Jewish state.
A country which is smaller than the Kruger National Park – less than one quarter of one per cent of the land mass of the Arab world – Israel is the only place on earth where Jews have formed the majority, the only place where they have been able to rule themselves and defend themselves, the only place where they have been able to do what every other people takes for granted – to live as a nation, sharing its own destiny and creating a society according to its own values.
Only in Israel can the Jew speak the Jewish language, live by the Jewish calendar, walk where their ancestors walked and continue the story they began. Yet still it has to fight for the right to exist.
So often the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is portrayed as a zero sum game in which one side wins and the other side loses. But from violence both sides lose, from peace both sides gain.
What matters, therefore, is that all involved work for peace, a peace that allows Israel and the Palestinians to live in dignity and freedom without fear, a peace in which each makes space for the other, a peace in which the children of Abraham – Jews, Christians and Arabs – live together as brothers and sisters, part of the same extended family, a peace that heals the wounds of the past – for the sake of generations not yet born.
Israel is the country whose national anthem, Hatikvah, means “hope”. Israel is the home of hope and on the occasion of its 60th anniversary it is fitting that the people of God will express that hope by praying for peace in the Holy Land.
David Abel, co-chairperson, Support Association for Zionism, George
An article written in www.theherald.co.za recently captures the essence of Israel's existence; its desire to live in peace the challenges confronting the Jewish State.
60 years after founding, no peace for Israel
SIXTY years after the declaration of independence as a sovereign Jewish state on May 14, 1948, Israel has not yet found peace (shalom).
Judaism is twice as old as Christianity and three times older than Islam – yet there are 82 Christian countries, 56 Muslim countries and only one Jewish state.
A country which is smaller than the Kruger National Park – less than one quarter of one per cent of the land mass of the Arab world – Israel is the only place on earth where Jews have formed the majority, the only place where they have been able to rule themselves and defend themselves, the only place where they have been able to do what every other people takes for granted – to live as a nation, sharing its own destiny and creating a society according to its own values.
Only in Israel can the Jew speak the Jewish language, live by the Jewish calendar, walk where their ancestors walked and continue the story they began. Yet still it has to fight for the right to exist.
So often the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians is portrayed as a zero sum game in which one side wins and the other side loses. But from violence both sides lose, from peace both sides gain.
What matters, therefore, is that all involved work for peace, a peace that allows Israel and the Palestinians to live in dignity and freedom without fear, a peace in which each makes space for the other, a peace in which the children of Abraham – Jews, Christians and Arabs – live together as brothers and sisters, part of the same extended family, a peace that heals the wounds of the past – for the sake of generations not yet born.
Israel is the country whose national anthem, Hatikvah, means “hope”. Israel is the home of hope and on the occasion of its 60th anniversary it is fitting that the people of God will express that hope by praying for peace in the Holy Land.
David Abel, co-chairperson, Support Association for Zionism, George
What really happened
Israeli bombing of suspected Syrian nuclear reactor spreads fear throughout the Middle East
The September 2007 precision strike, by the IAF, against a suspected Syrian nuclear site has stirred up a hornets nest.
The Israeli Air Force, guided by operatives on the ground, deep within Syrian territory smashed a suspected nuclear facility.
For several months both Israel and Syria were mum on the incident. Both have their reasons. Israel not eager to make public it’s illegal air raid across sovereign territory and Syria not willing to disclose the likelihood that it is conducting a covert nuclear operation.
Syrian admittance of a nuclear operation would arouse instant condemnation from the IAEA under M. El Baradei. Further economic sanctions – the likes of which Iran is being heavily subjected to – would certainly follow.
Israel is keen to downplay the incident amidst growing discontentment from the Palestinians in their fractured two-state (Gaza and the West Bank) and their frail leadership; rising tensions with Hezbollah and of course the Syrians.
The use of force against suspected nuclear targets is frowned upon. The international community is eager to desist unilateral initiatives in favour of agreed upon diplomatic; political and economic sanctions.
Of course the only point agreed upon by members within the Security Council is their disagreement. Thus the organ of international peacekeeping is akin to a toothless tiger when the opinions of its members result in moribund resolutions.
Israel is unwilling to accept an enemy neighbour armed with nuclear capability. Thus the rapid dismembering of Syria’s capability was paramount. A larger threat, to the Israelis and the world at large, appears to be Iran.
That American security reports found no evidence corroborating nuclear proliferation in Iran, the Iranians have publicly announced, on multiple occasions, their desire for the rapid development of uranium enrichment.
This does not bode well for the teetering world order. With the Mid-East as a potential hotbed for a nuclear arms race, countries are aligning themselves with either side. Moderate Arab states are reluctant to criticize Iran, for fear of arousing the wrath of sympathizers. The delicate situation requires global unity to apply sufficient pressure to bring closure to the matter.
Israel meanwhile sits with its ears to the ground. The drums of war are beginning to sound in the distance.
The September 2007 precision strike, by the IAF, against a suspected Syrian nuclear site has stirred up a hornets nest.
The Israeli Air Force, guided by operatives on the ground, deep within Syrian territory smashed a suspected nuclear facility.
For several months both Israel and Syria were mum on the incident. Both have their reasons. Israel not eager to make public it’s illegal air raid across sovereign territory and Syria not willing to disclose the likelihood that it is conducting a covert nuclear operation.
Syrian admittance of a nuclear operation would arouse instant condemnation from the IAEA under M. El Baradei. Further economic sanctions – the likes of which Iran is being heavily subjected to – would certainly follow.
Israel is keen to downplay the incident amidst growing discontentment from the Palestinians in their fractured two-state (Gaza and the West Bank) and their frail leadership; rising tensions with Hezbollah and of course the Syrians.
The use of force against suspected nuclear targets is frowned upon. The international community is eager to desist unilateral initiatives in favour of agreed upon diplomatic; political and economic sanctions.
Of course the only point agreed upon by members within the Security Council is their disagreement. Thus the organ of international peacekeeping is akin to a toothless tiger when the opinions of its members result in moribund resolutions.
Israel is unwilling to accept an enemy neighbour armed with nuclear capability. Thus the rapid dismembering of Syria’s capability was paramount. A larger threat, to the Israelis and the world at large, appears to be Iran.
That American security reports found no evidence corroborating nuclear proliferation in Iran, the Iranians have publicly announced, on multiple occasions, their desire for the rapid development of uranium enrichment.
This does not bode well for the teetering world order. With the Mid-East as a potential hotbed for a nuclear arms race, countries are aligning themselves with either side. Moderate Arab states are reluctant to criticize Iran, for fear of arousing the wrath of sympathizers. The delicate situation requires global unity to apply sufficient pressure to bring closure to the matter.
Israel meanwhile sits with its ears to the ground. The drums of war are beginning to sound in the distance.
The Syrian position
Top-level envoy describes the unlikelihood of a break in the strategic alliance between Iran; Hezbollah and Syria.
Ongoing negotiations between Syria and Israel via the Turkish intermediary have given hope to renewed peace efforts between the enemy states. Syria demands that the Golan Heights – a strategic area for both Israel and Syria that was captured by Israel in 1967 – be returned as a prerequisite for peace talks.
President Assad has expressed his desire to continue in peace negotiations provided that the Golan Heights are returned. His Israeli counterpart – Ehud Olmert – has some preconditions himself.
In order for Israel to be content with returning the Golan Heights to Syria, it is necessary – according to Israeli officials – that Syria cut ties with the terror-sponsors. These include Hezbollah and Iran.
Recently a high-level advisor to the Syrian regime made it clear that Syria is unlikely to detach itself from Iran or Hezbollah for the sake of peace with Israel. This places the opportunity for peace in a precarious predicament.
Without a guarantee that Syria will desist in enemy activities, handing over the Golan Heights will simply allow enemies of the State of Israel to camp out on Israel’s doorstep. Such a solution is hardly attractive to Israel.
The leftists in the Knesset may feel that a conciliatory gesture such as handing back the Golan Heights may be viewed positively by the outside world. If the Syrians then continue to allow weapons to pass from Iran into southern Lebanon it will again be up to Israel to prove such actions are being undertaken. This results in a zero-sum for Israel. They will have lost face and land in the interests of a peace that was barely worth the paper it was scribbled on.
The problem it seems comes to down to Iran. As the major antagonist in the region, it is Iran that pulls the strings with Syria; Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran may be fighting a proxy war against Israel now, but international pressure may yet put an end to such bullying tactics in the near future.
Ongoing negotiations between Syria and Israel via the Turkish intermediary have given hope to renewed peace efforts between the enemy states. Syria demands that the Golan Heights – a strategic area for both Israel and Syria that was captured by Israel in 1967 – be returned as a prerequisite for peace talks.
President Assad has expressed his desire to continue in peace negotiations provided that the Golan Heights are returned. His Israeli counterpart – Ehud Olmert – has some preconditions himself.
In order for Israel to be content with returning the Golan Heights to Syria, it is necessary – according to Israeli officials – that Syria cut ties with the terror-sponsors. These include Hezbollah and Iran.
Recently a high-level advisor to the Syrian regime made it clear that Syria is unlikely to detach itself from Iran or Hezbollah for the sake of peace with Israel. This places the opportunity for peace in a precarious predicament.
Without a guarantee that Syria will desist in enemy activities, handing over the Golan Heights will simply allow enemies of the State of Israel to camp out on Israel’s doorstep. Such a solution is hardly attractive to Israel.
The leftists in the Knesset may feel that a conciliatory gesture such as handing back the Golan Heights may be viewed positively by the outside world. If the Syrians then continue to allow weapons to pass from Iran into southern Lebanon it will again be up to Israel to prove such actions are being undertaken. This results in a zero-sum for Israel. They will have lost face and land in the interests of a peace that was barely worth the paper it was scribbled on.
The problem it seems comes to down to Iran. As the major antagonist in the region, it is Iran that pulls the strings with Syria; Hamas and Hezbollah. Iran may be fighting a proxy war against Israel now, but international pressure may yet put an end to such bullying tactics in the near future.
Looking back
Thou shalt ne’er forget
Holocaust Memorial Day marks the 63rd anniversary of one of the greatest crimes ever committed against humanity.
Nazi occupation of much of Europe from 1941 onwards resulted in the widespread deportation of European Jewry to ghettos and concentration camps across Poland and Germany, among others.
That close to 300 000 Jews were able to leave Germany and Austria between 1933 and 1939 allowed for an even greater tragedy to be averted. The countless millions who perished were often taken by complete surprise at the hands of Einzatzgruppen – Nazi mobile killing units – while the Nazis plundered one country after another.
The Jews were being systematically slaughtered and removed from every sector of society, until nothing more than a homeless, faceless, wandering soul remained – awaiting deportation to death chambers or slave labor camps. The vehement anti-Jew propaganda, perpetrated by Goebels’ mastery of the genre, resulted in a German society that was complacent and accepting of the miserable fate of the Jews.
Following the horrific pogroms of Kristalnacht on November 9 and 10 1938, masses of Jews were rounded up and sent to camps. Jewish businesses; synagogues and homes were ransacked and plundered, while the German populace stood by and did nothing. The world – informed by various emissaries; diplomats; correspondents and public officials likewise witnessed the horrors of that night.
While Britain and the USA allowed for greater Jewish emigration, their tolerance was being severely tested by stringent immigration laws and intolerance toward large Jewish influxes. After war was declared, Germany’s borders were sealed and so too was the fate of European Jewry. What few could escape to Palestine; Britain and China did, but they represented a pittance of the estimated 9 million stuck in Europe.
Adolph Hitler and his henchmen were eager to rid the world of the Jew. Goering – a former asylum patient – was given the go-ahead to expedite Jewish movement out of Germany. When this was taking too long, deportations to camps became the order of the day. German annexation of foreign territory resulted in their acquisition of large numbers of Jews to add to their extermination lists.
That the Germans were accurate and precise with their lists; documents and records was proof enough to corroborate the unbelievable; the unthinkable horrors that were to follow. German admission of such atrocities flies in the face of Holocaust denial. That a society was complacent while their fellow Germans were being slaughtered baffles the mind; that a supposedly advanced and civilized people were capable of such barbarism defies logic. That a cultured and educated people could resort to such vitriol smacks of bigotry of the highest order.
By doing nothing all are guilty; by failing to stand up to such inhumanity all bare responsibility. Thus while the Allies trumpeted their victory over Nazism; what was Nazism was merely a thinly veiled guise for all of Germany of yesteryear. A few brave men and women stood up to the iniquitous regime, often to their own detriment. It is to these heroes that the world owes an incredible debt of gratitude.
To them we say: we salute you. To the rest, there is no fate worse than having to live with an uneasy conscience. The true horrors of that time will never be forgotten and as such they will never be repeated.
Holocaust Memorial Day marks the 63rd anniversary of one of the greatest crimes ever committed against humanity.
Nazi occupation of much of Europe from 1941 onwards resulted in the widespread deportation of European Jewry to ghettos and concentration camps across Poland and Germany, among others.
That close to 300 000 Jews were able to leave Germany and Austria between 1933 and 1939 allowed for an even greater tragedy to be averted. The countless millions who perished were often taken by complete surprise at the hands of Einzatzgruppen – Nazi mobile killing units – while the Nazis plundered one country after another.
The Jews were being systematically slaughtered and removed from every sector of society, until nothing more than a homeless, faceless, wandering soul remained – awaiting deportation to death chambers or slave labor camps. The vehement anti-Jew propaganda, perpetrated by Goebels’ mastery of the genre, resulted in a German society that was complacent and accepting of the miserable fate of the Jews.
Following the horrific pogroms of Kristalnacht on November 9 and 10 1938, masses of Jews were rounded up and sent to camps. Jewish businesses; synagogues and homes were ransacked and plundered, while the German populace stood by and did nothing. The world – informed by various emissaries; diplomats; correspondents and public officials likewise witnessed the horrors of that night.
While Britain and the USA allowed for greater Jewish emigration, their tolerance was being severely tested by stringent immigration laws and intolerance toward large Jewish influxes. After war was declared, Germany’s borders were sealed and so too was the fate of European Jewry. What few could escape to Palestine; Britain and China did, but they represented a pittance of the estimated 9 million stuck in Europe.
Adolph Hitler and his henchmen were eager to rid the world of the Jew. Goering – a former asylum patient – was given the go-ahead to expedite Jewish movement out of Germany. When this was taking too long, deportations to camps became the order of the day. German annexation of foreign territory resulted in their acquisition of large numbers of Jews to add to their extermination lists.
That the Germans were accurate and precise with their lists; documents and records was proof enough to corroborate the unbelievable; the unthinkable horrors that were to follow. German admission of such atrocities flies in the face of Holocaust denial. That a society was complacent while their fellow Germans were being slaughtered baffles the mind; that a supposedly advanced and civilized people were capable of such barbarism defies logic. That a cultured and educated people could resort to such vitriol smacks of bigotry of the highest order.
By doing nothing all are guilty; by failing to stand up to such inhumanity all bare responsibility. Thus while the Allies trumpeted their victory over Nazism; what was Nazism was merely a thinly veiled guise for all of Germany of yesteryear. A few brave men and women stood up to the iniquitous regime, often to their own detriment. It is to these heroes that the world owes an incredible debt of gratitude.
To them we say: we salute you. To the rest, there is no fate worse than having to live with an uneasy conscience. The true horrors of that time will never be forgotten and as such they will never be repeated.
Cautiously celebratory
The music plays; the parties continue. Sixty years later and the State of Israel has much to celebrate.
Iran wins round after round
Islamic Republic has the world by the short and curly
President Ahmadinejad has once again raised the ire of the West and once again the threat of sanctions and incentives are at the negotiating table.
It appears that the world’s leaders are intent on finding a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear proliferation attempts. These measures are comprised of harsh economic sanctions; diplomatic pressure and political isolation. But if Iran complies - and this is the bizarre part - it will reap windfall gains. Smacks of appeasement - that's because it is.
Best case scenario - Iran complies by temporarily suspending enrichment – it appears that the world is willing to shower the Islamic Republic of Iran with praise and gifts alike. But the Iranians are having none of it. Why one may ask? The reason is clear: they are so close to completion that they can smell it. A nuclear-armed Iran has infinitely more leverage than an Iran attempting to gain nuclear potential.
Iran is a nation built on tremendous wealth. That wealth from its vast petroleum supplies has helped precious little in alleviating the growing poverty of the Iranian people. Why then has a nation with an abundance of natural resources failed to capitalize on it’s wealth? Naturally isolation; war; corruption and mismanagement have resulted in Iranians living below their potential. But it is the nature of the regime - one that is repressive - that stifles growth and maintains misery.
This complex question requires more than mere prodding. Suffice it to say the Iranian hard-line president has chosen to anger the west in an attempt to divert growing internal tensions. Naturally a scapegoat is ideal in such situations and that is Israel. Jew-haters know this line all too well. It works every time - but Israel has absolutely nothing to do with Iran's survival yet Iran has everything to do with Israel's survival/demise.
According to Iranian spin doctors: Israel is America’s representative in the Middle East. Israel has an aggressive, expansionist programme intent on colonizing the region and bringing suffering to the Arab people. For the majority of different populations of the region this propaganda is largely accepted.
Why is this so? It is simple: an entity that is democratic (despite protestations to the contrary); Judaic and western in culture is a natural affront to the largely Islamic; conservative culture existing in the region. Many of the regimes in the Arab world are long standing. These include families and kingdoms that have been around for generations. This style of governance would be severely hamstrung if democratic ideals were embraced.
Therefore the reluctance to accept Israel as a neighbour is more of a rejection of democracy than anything else. The people are used to being ruled by blood and iron. Women are subservient to men and religion is the way in which people must live their lives. A democratic society that embraces secular society is an abomination to Arab countries. A democratic Jewish society is even more disquieting.
Therefore Iran continues to provoke Israel – in so doing it tries to garner Arab support - so that it can boast a place in the greater scheme of things. Why threaten Israel? Simply because its easy to do so. It unites the dissenters in the region and it provides a militant leadership with the perfect enemy - one that has been made the scape goat since time immemorial.
Iran’s rhetoric has more ominous overtones. A mad man simply doesn’t build a nuclear weapon if he doesn’t intend to use the weapon should he wish to threaten others or feel threatened himself.
President Ahmadinejad has once again raised the ire of the West and once again the threat of sanctions and incentives are at the negotiating table.
It appears that the world’s leaders are intent on finding a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear proliferation attempts. These measures are comprised of harsh economic sanctions; diplomatic pressure and political isolation. But if Iran complies - and this is the bizarre part - it will reap windfall gains. Smacks of appeasement - that's because it is.
Best case scenario - Iran complies by temporarily suspending enrichment – it appears that the world is willing to shower the Islamic Republic of Iran with praise and gifts alike. But the Iranians are having none of it. Why one may ask? The reason is clear: they are so close to completion that they can smell it. A nuclear-armed Iran has infinitely more leverage than an Iran attempting to gain nuclear potential.
Iran is a nation built on tremendous wealth. That wealth from its vast petroleum supplies has helped precious little in alleviating the growing poverty of the Iranian people. Why then has a nation with an abundance of natural resources failed to capitalize on it’s wealth? Naturally isolation; war; corruption and mismanagement have resulted in Iranians living below their potential. But it is the nature of the regime - one that is repressive - that stifles growth and maintains misery.
This complex question requires more than mere prodding. Suffice it to say the Iranian hard-line president has chosen to anger the west in an attempt to divert growing internal tensions. Naturally a scapegoat is ideal in such situations and that is Israel. Jew-haters know this line all too well. It works every time - but Israel has absolutely nothing to do with Iran's survival yet Iran has everything to do with Israel's survival/demise.
According to Iranian spin doctors: Israel is America’s representative in the Middle East. Israel has an aggressive, expansionist programme intent on colonizing the region and bringing suffering to the Arab people. For the majority of different populations of the region this propaganda is largely accepted.
Why is this so? It is simple: an entity that is democratic (despite protestations to the contrary); Judaic and western in culture is a natural affront to the largely Islamic; conservative culture existing in the region. Many of the regimes in the Arab world are long standing. These include families and kingdoms that have been around for generations. This style of governance would be severely hamstrung if democratic ideals were embraced.
Therefore the reluctance to accept Israel as a neighbour is more of a rejection of democracy than anything else. The people are used to being ruled by blood and iron. Women are subservient to men and religion is the way in which people must live their lives. A democratic society that embraces secular society is an abomination to Arab countries. A democratic Jewish society is even more disquieting.
Therefore Iran continues to provoke Israel – in so doing it tries to garner Arab support - so that it can boast a place in the greater scheme of things. Why threaten Israel? Simply because its easy to do so. It unites the dissenters in the region and it provides a militant leadership with the perfect enemy - one that has been made the scape goat since time immemorial.
Iran’s rhetoric has more ominous overtones. A mad man simply doesn’t build a nuclear weapon if he doesn’t intend to use the weapon should he wish to threaten others or feel threatened himself.
Israeli Presidential Conference
Israel President and former Prime Minister, Shimon Peres - an internationally renowned icon of wisdom, fortitude and idealism, championed the 60th anniversary of Israel's existence. Among the many decorated guests; analysts; nobel laureates and world leaders were a capacity crowd of future leaders; inventors; investors and political strategists. The star of the show however, besides for Peres, was outgoing American President and staunch Israel ally - President George W. Bush.President George W. Bush made an historic entrance to the ICC in Jerusalem to mark Israel's 60th anniversary celebrations. The American President - the leader of the free world - was honored with a thunderous standing ovation that overshadowed that of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. President Bush pledged unwavering American support for Israel in the face of the existential threat posed by Iran's nuclear weapons program. Indeed Bush's comments that Israel is not merely a nation of 7 million free people fighting terror, but a nation of 307 million free people fighting terror rang out in the Knesset when Bush spoke on Thursday afternoon.
In addition to the most powerful leader of the free world, his envoys and emmissaries littered the conference. Special mention must be made of Dennis Ross, the MidEast peace envoy, who chaired the proceedings. Ross pointed to the technological advancements in Israel that are completely out of proportion, both to the country's size and lack of mineral and natural resources. Panelists pointed to the abundance of Human Capital available in Israel. As industry giant Warren Buffet stated "Always bet on Brains" when refering to Israel's intellectual genius.
Other significant personalities at the conference included: Google Co-Founder(Sergy Brin); Media and Internet Mogul (Rupert Murdoch); Yahoo President (Susan Decker) and Former Warner Bros. President and Yahoo President - Terry Semel, among countless others. Celebrities and Presidents from Jon Voight to the President of Albania were among the star-studded event. Henry Kissinger lent wisdom while delegates spoke of Israel's past and future challenges within the ambit of a successful and solid 60 years of existence.
Top Leaders Pledge Unity
The Israeli Presidential Conference hosted by eminent world leader, Shimon Peres, was a resounding success.
The octogenarian showed no sign of slowing down as his desire to see the State of Israel securely placed among the developed nations of the world.
President Peres, flanked by President George Bush; Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu; Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Barak was clearly reveling from the fantastic opportunities provided for Israeli unity.
An audience comprised of some of the most respected industry leaders; politicians and business people packed the auditorium as speaker after speaker commmanded the utmost respect.
Had it not been for people like Rupert Murdoch; Surgey Brin; Dennis Ross and Henry Kissinger the conference may not have been so impressive. But it was a resounding success owing to the committment of so many to the State of Israel.
While the notable exception of Arab delegates was apparent, it must nonetheless be noted that there were leaders from all part of the world - Africa; Eastern and Western Europe; North America and beyond. The global affiliation commmemorating Israe's 60 years as a State was marked by commitment and confidence.
There are challenges - great challenges; there are existential threats, but there is an iron will that is as resolute as the spirit free men not relinquish that most sacred value.
The octogenarian showed no sign of slowing down as his desire to see the State of Israel securely placed among the developed nations of the world.
President Peres, flanked by President George Bush; Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu; Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Barak was clearly reveling from the fantastic opportunities provided for Israeli unity.
An audience comprised of some of the most respected industry leaders; politicians and business people packed the auditorium as speaker after speaker commmanded the utmost respect.
Had it not been for people like Rupert Murdoch; Surgey Brin; Dennis Ross and Henry Kissinger the conference may not have been so impressive. But it was a resounding success owing to the committment of so many to the State of Israel.
While the notable exception of Arab delegates was apparent, it must nonetheless be noted that there were leaders from all part of the world - Africa; Eastern and Western Europe; North America and beyond. The global affiliation commmemorating Israe's 60 years as a State was marked by commitment and confidence.
There are challenges - great challenges; there are existential threats, but there is an iron will that is as resolute as the spirit free men not relinquish that most sacred value.
Notables at Presidential Conference
In descending order the list of notables include the following:
Eli Wiesel, Author of 40 books; Nobel Laureate and Holocaust Survivor
Mayor of Haifa - Yona Yahav
Ra'anan Gissin (Reserve Colonel in IDF (Phd); Strategic Analyst and Advisor to Ariel Sharon. Currently involved in Media and Public Affairs)
Dennis Ross: US Mideast Peace Envoy and government advisor
Henry Kissinger Leading Statesman and former Secretary of State
SA Jewry comes under attack
The relative calm enjoyed by Jews in South Africa is slowly but surely coming to an end as marked by increasingly virulent anti-Israel sentiment; brewing Antisemitism and a government and media that is unwilling and unable to combat this prejudicial scourge upon the Jewish People. In the following link - supplied by Supernatural.blogs.com, Anti-Semitism in all its tardiness and grotesqueness is displayed. These are the reactions of pro-Palestinian supporters at a leading South African university - the University of the Witwatersrand - to Israel's historic 60th birthday celebrations.
It must be borne in mind that there has been a paradigm shift in South African political affiliation in regards to the Mideast crisis. While the apartheid government saw fit to identify itself more with Israel - despite the fact that Antisemitism was rampant within National Party circles, the ANC has gone the other way. The absurdity of NP politics and the apartheid regime - a miserable, repressive dictatorship of sinister proportions was that none of their founding members were even steadfast adherents of their vile creed. The ideologues of apartheid in Verwoerd and Malan and their ilk was lost on that generation. For none of their successors had the courage of their convictions to continue in their acerbic; irascible manner. Indeed the days of prejudice and intolerance within the NP were over. Like rats scurrying from a sinking ship, one Afrikaner after another abandoned the NP and joined ranks with the monolithic ANC - hoping not only to secure some waning influence, but more importantly to serve their selfish financial interests.
This begs the question: where are these ideologues today? Where are the hardcore Afrikaners who desperately fought to ensure the survival of their culture; their traditions and way of life? Where is the inimitable Boer - a champion on the frontiers of an African land. The Boer is gone. He is a shadow of himself; lost in the transition; faded and jaded as he limps between places today. The Boer of old is a broken man hiding behind the excuse of a united nation. His fears have silenced him; his spirit sunken and his assimilation complete. A pocket of them stubbornly resist the change but it is these fools, stalwarts of the past, that make a mockery of a once proud people. And as the rapid, widespread changes take root, it is not only the Boer that has become entrenched in yesteryear. It is now the African foreigners who are subjected to daily pogroms of vile, putrefying hatred. Xenophobia - the likes of which are sweeping across the pages of the world media is as savage as it can get. Innocent men, women and children are having their families torn apart by sheer carnage, savagery and inhuman conduct. Murders; brutal attacks and broken glass - that's what many refugees, asylum seekers and illegal immigrants are facing today. Wave after wave of vicious onslaughts continue to plunder these defenseless people. Indeed history is repeating itself and one has to look no further than Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany to understand the parallels. Again the official silence is disquieting.
Now as Jews mark the 60th anniversary of Israel's Statehood, pro-Palestinian radicals have the shameless audacity and criminal voracity to spew their ill-informed hate-filled rhetoric all over this once prestigious University Campus. Their misguided tripe; replete with Jew-hatred is all pervasive. That the shift in political circles in favour of the Palestinians has been firmly entrenched only serves to strengthen the argument of Jew-haters the country over. Now the transformation is complete - the democratic Jewish state - Israel - has been tarred with the brush of apartheid; likened to Nazi Germany and been accused of crimes against humanity. Does such misguided vilification deserve a response: most certainly. The enemy of peace is radical Islam. The light is Israel. Whomsoever dares to challenge the autonomy; independence and right of Israel to exist does so at their own peril. The house of Judah has stood the test of time and the right of the people of Israel to live in peace, within secure borders, with friendly neighbours alongside an independent Palestine is undeniable.
The wanton violence in South Africa has claimed countless lives. It is not only minorities whose lives are being threatened, it is anybody and everybody. South Africa needs a champion of justice. It needs leadership capable of stemming the tide of societal decay. From over 120 000 Jews barely a decade ago, the Jewish community now stands around 65 000. Official statistics cite an increasing number of people emigrating - predominantly whites - statistics show in the region of 20% having already left the country. This trend cannot continue, not if South Africa wants to remain a competitive and viable destination for multi-national investment and tourism.
Click on HATRED for shocking graphic material
It must be borne in mind that there has been a paradigm shift in South African political affiliation in regards to the Mideast crisis. While the apartheid government saw fit to identify itself more with Israel - despite the fact that Antisemitism was rampant within National Party circles, the ANC has gone the other way. The absurdity of NP politics and the apartheid regime - a miserable, repressive dictatorship of sinister proportions was that none of their founding members were even steadfast adherents of their vile creed. The ideologues of apartheid in Verwoerd and Malan and their ilk was lost on that generation. For none of their successors had the courage of their convictions to continue in their acerbic; irascible manner. Indeed the days of prejudice and intolerance within the NP were over. Like rats scurrying from a sinking ship, one Afrikaner after another abandoned the NP and joined ranks with the monolithic ANC - hoping not only to secure some waning influence, but more importantly to serve their selfish financial interests.
This begs the question: where are these ideologues today? Where are the hardcore Afrikaners who desperately fought to ensure the survival of their culture; their traditions and way of life? Where is the inimitable Boer - a champion on the frontiers of an African land. The Boer is gone. He is a shadow of himself; lost in the transition; faded and jaded as he limps between places today. The Boer of old is a broken man hiding behind the excuse of a united nation. His fears have silenced him; his spirit sunken and his assimilation complete. A pocket of them stubbornly resist the change but it is these fools, stalwarts of the past, that make a mockery of a once proud people. And as the rapid, widespread changes take root, it is not only the Boer that has become entrenched in yesteryear. It is now the African foreigners who are subjected to daily pogroms of vile, putrefying hatred. Xenophobia - the likes of which are sweeping across the pages of the world media is as savage as it can get. Innocent men, women and children are having their families torn apart by sheer carnage, savagery and inhuman conduct. Murders; brutal attacks and broken glass - that's what many refugees, asylum seekers and illegal immigrants are facing today. Wave after wave of vicious onslaughts continue to plunder these defenseless people. Indeed history is repeating itself and one has to look no further than Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany to understand the parallels. Again the official silence is disquieting.
Now as Jews mark the 60th anniversary of Israel's Statehood, pro-Palestinian radicals have the shameless audacity and criminal voracity to spew their ill-informed hate-filled rhetoric all over this once prestigious University Campus. Their misguided tripe; replete with Jew-hatred is all pervasive. That the shift in political circles in favour of the Palestinians has been firmly entrenched only serves to strengthen the argument of Jew-haters the country over. Now the transformation is complete - the democratic Jewish state - Israel - has been tarred with the brush of apartheid; likened to Nazi Germany and been accused of crimes against humanity. Does such misguided vilification deserve a response: most certainly. The enemy of peace is radical Islam. The light is Israel. Whomsoever dares to challenge the autonomy; independence and right of Israel to exist does so at their own peril. The house of Judah has stood the test of time and the right of the people of Israel to live in peace, within secure borders, with friendly neighbours alongside an independent Palestine is undeniable.
The wanton violence in South Africa has claimed countless lives. It is not only minorities whose lives are being threatened, it is anybody and everybody. South Africa needs a champion of justice. It needs leadership capable of stemming the tide of societal decay. From over 120 000 Jews barely a decade ago, the Jewish community now stands around 65 000. Official statistics cite an increasing number of people emigrating - predominantly whites - statistics show in the region of 20% having already left the country. This trend cannot continue, not if South Africa wants to remain a competitive and viable destination for multi-national investment and tourism.
Click on HATRED for shocking graphic material
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
