Pioneers of the Periphery: Olim of the SouthGot that pioneering spirit? You’re invited to help build Israel’s periphery by planting roots in southern soil with Nefesh B’Nefesh.
President Obama’s nastiness toward Prime Minister Netanyahu would be alarming even it were merely a matter of style to impress the Muslim world. But Obama’s motivation is much more substantive. He seeks to impose a solution – whether it leads to peace or it doesn’t – that will return Israel essentially to the 1949-1967 armistice lines, including a loss of Jewish sovereignty in the Old City of Jerusalem.
If Israel doesn’t accept his diktat, Obama could have the UN Security Council recognize the lines he sets as the international border between Israel and a new Palestinian state.
Israel achieved peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan. While it may be an exaggeration even to say that those agreements have led to a cold peace, there was at least an end to violent conflict.
There is no basis whatsoever to think that a withdrawal to the 1967 borders would result in an end to Palestinian violence. Even if one buys into the dubious idea that Fatah wants peace, Hamas would still control Gaza – and could be expected to take control of Judea and Samaria if the IDF were not present. An end to the IDF presence in Judea and Samaria would also put Jerusalem and Tel Aviv well within range of the same missiles that are launched from Gaza into southern Israel.
In Jerusalem, putting Jaffa Gate under Palestinian control – as proposed in the final status plans that supposedly “everyone knows” are inevitable – would quickly end the Jewish presence in the Old City and make visits to the Western Wall too dangerous to contemplate, not to mention expose nearby neighborhoods in “west” Jerusalem to sniper fire emanating from the higher ground in the Old City.
Inconvenient facts like these don’t interest or concern the Obama administration – which has proven to be shockingly ignorant about reality. As just one example of this, Ynet reported that during their recent meeting, Netanyahu had to explain to Obama that the northern Jerusalem neighborhood of Ramat Shlomo is not in the Old City.
Also showing little interest or concern about Israel are the Jewish members of New York’s Congressional delegation. At the recent AIPAC conference, Senator Charles Schumer claimed to be “a shomer Yisrael, a guardian of Israel.” But Schumer has been completely silent about the Israel-bashing by the Obama administration. Evidently, the guardian of Israel slumbers and sleeps.
Jewish members of the House of Representatives have been no better. Jerrold Nadler hasn’t seemed to have anything to say at all. Gary Ackerman told The New York Times that this is “a moment for the Obama administration to say to our Israeli partners and our Palestinian partners, ‘We need to see peace.’ ” Anthony Weiner has presented restrained criticism of the administration – better than his colleagues, but still a marked contrast to his typically aggressive style, which was recently on display in his vocal support for Obama’s health care reform bill.
The refusal of Democrats to publicly disagree with Obama should cause us to appreciate former senator Al D’Amato, a Republican who remained an outspoken supporter of Israel even when it faced pressure and censure from the Republican Reagan and Bush administrations.
There has been strong support of Israel from many conservative writers, as well as from some who had supported Obama’s presidential campaign, like Martin Peretz and Ed Koch. Also promising has been Rabbi Shmuley Boteach’s sharp criticism of Obama’s anti-Israel stance. After previously spending too much time chasing celebrities, the talented Rabbi Boteach now appears ready to lead on behalf of Israel.
But, unfortunately, the Jewish establishment has been completely ineffectual. Our establishment leaders may be sincere and well-meaning, but one wonders if some of them are too concerned about getting invitations to next year’s White House Chanukah party – or to Chelsea Clinton’s upcoming wedding.
It’s especially hard to understand why there has been no rally in support of Israel. Eight years ago, after hundreds of Israelis had been murdered in Yasir Arafat’s terror war, the establishment leadership finally woke up and organized a rally in Washington. On a workday right after Passover, more than 200,000 Jewish Americans came from across the country.
That rally saved lives. At a time when the U.S. was relentlessly bombing Afghanistan, President Bush had been publicly demanding an immediate IDF pullout from towns in Judea and Samaria. “I meant what I said to the prime minister of Israel. I expect there to be withdrawal without delay,” Bush insisted then. Those of us at the rally firmly stated our position: “No more Arafat” and “No double standard.” The IDF stayed. Two months later, Bush announced the U.S. would no longer deal with Arafat.
About the Author: Joseph Schick is producer of “Jerusalem ’67” (www.jerusalem67.com), a narrative feature film currently in development. He can be reached at jschick@jerusalem67.com.
If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.


Comments are closed.

No tweets found.

Starting next week, Professor Beres’s column will be on summer hiatus until September. * * * * * In June 1998, Prof. Beres, following publication of an op-ed article in The New York Times, was invited by then-Swiss Ambassador Thomas Borer to present personal testimony before the specially-constituted Swiss Commission on World War II in [...]

Israel is a country that understands security concerns. Many civil rights have been sacrificed in the name of security and Israelis are used to being checked every time they enter a shopping center, a large store or any public building. Americans recently learned that they, too, are subject to many checks on their most private activities.

Without a clear worldview, it is impossible to coherently deal with the challenge of the strategic changes taking place throughout the world – and particularly in the Middle East. Before our very eyes, a worldwide and local revolution is unfolding; their significance is greater than both World Wars combined.
No one can envy President Obama’s current dilemma over Syria.
His decision to begin arming the Syrian rebels challenging Bashar Assad’s regime drew charges that the rebel forces are driven by jihad movements, particularly al Qaeda. Further, many rebel spokesmen have regularly denounced Israel and suggested that once in power they will end Mr. Assad’s policy of not rocking the boat with Israel. How, then, critics ask, could the president align the U.S. with the rebels?
In a gushing report on the election of Hassan Rohani as Iran’s new president, The New York Times began with this: “In a striking repudiation of the ultraconservatives who wield power in Iran, voters…overwhelmingly elected a mild-mannered cleric who advocates greater personal freedoms and a more conciliatory approach to the world.”
Last month in this space we noted that the New York State Assembly was considering legislation that would prohibit domestic insurers from including on their financial statements investments in companies that engage in investment activities in Iran. These financial statements are relied upon by the state to determine whether the company is solvent and able to pay claims. That bill has since passed the Assembly, but the New York State Senate is balking at passing it as well.
There is no other candidate running for mayor who supports our community’s values as Salgado does.
If the eyes are the window to the soul, then children’s eyes are the window to the Almighty Himself.
Adding Turkey to the list of volatile states would mean even more uncertainty for Israel.
Is there no one who remembers this recent history?
Making Rouhani the president was a brilliant strategic move for Khamene’i.
Noone, least of all me, wants to see any Arab child suffer, God forbid.
The Sanctuary was built with an ezrat nashim, a separate area for women.
The 686 men who expressed their desire to run in Iran’s presidential election were whittled down to 8.

It’s election season, so Republicans can’t be blamed for expressing outrage when the political platform at last week’s Democratic National Convention removed support for Jerusalem being the capital of Israel.
Elie Wiesel and Ronald Lauder recently criticized the Obama administration in separately placed newspaper advertisements. Instead of listening to Wiesel and Lauder’s concerns, Haaretz reported, administration officials expressed “harsh criticism” over their ads.
President Obama’s nastiness toward Prime Minister Netanyahu would be alarming even it were merely a matter of style to impress the Muslim world. But Obama’s motivation is much more substantive. He seeks to impose a solution – whether it leads to peace or it doesn’t – that will return Israel essentially to the 1949-1967 armistice lines, including a loss of Jewish sovereignty in the Old City of Jerusalem.
It’s not easy to counter images of Arab families purportedly being evicted from their homes – such as the pictures of residents of the northern Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah that were published last week in The New York Times and elsewhere. But Israel must at least try.
In January 2001, as President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Ehud Barak begged Yasir Arafat to take a break from killing Jews to accept the Old City of Jerusalem, hundreds of thousands of Israelis rallied in Jerusalem to oppose the city’s division. Simultaneously, Rabbi Haskel Lookstein’s Congregation Kehilath Jeshurun hosted an event in solidarity.
Rabbi Asher Lopatin, longtime spiritual leader of Chicago’s Modern Orthodox Anshe Sholom B’nai Israel Congregation, comments about his famous congregant, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel; Jewish rights to settle in Israel; plans to build in the Negev; Orthodoxy and pluralism; and political talk from the pulpit.
On Sunday night, many observant Jews will be among the hundreds of millions of people watching the Jets fan’s nightmare as the Giants play the Patriots in Super Bowl XLII.
Since he was elected three years ago, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has expressed skepticism that a permanent settlement with the Palestinians is possible, and has instead sought an interim agreement.
Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/israel-and-the-silence-of-our-leaders/2010/04/14/
Scan this QR code to visit this page online:
No related posts.