Many endings, but a chance to move on

...Until now, it was US pressure on Israel for concessions to the Palestinians that kept the Israeli Left going. Now, without any leadership, with its power base in the permanent bureaucracy weakened, and the US role as mediator wholly discredited not only among the Israeli public, but in the US media, the Left has nothing to latch on to. If the government uses the opportunity to abandon the two-state paradigm, it stands its best chance in 20 years of succeeding.

Caroline Glick..
carolineglick.com..
04 April '14..

On Monday, former prime minister Ehud Olmert’s career ended.

Earlier this month, former IDF chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Gabi Ashkenazi’s career ended.

And on Tuesday, the phony peace process ended.

In the lead-up to last year’s elections, the media and key political figures were yearning for Olmert’s return to politics.

In July 2008, Olmert was forced to cede leadership of the Kadima party, and so opt out of running for reelection, when then-attorney-general Menahem Mazuz announced he was indicting the premier on corruption charges. Olmert left office in March 2009 when his government was replaced by Binyamin Netanyahu’s coalition government.

The public abandoned its support for Olmert in the summer of 2006 as a result of his incompetent leadership of the Second Lebanon War. By the end of the summer, Olmert’s approval rating stood at 3 percent. But with the able assistance of the media, and of Yisrael Beytenu chairman Avigdor Liberman who saved Olmert’s government by joining it, Olmert was able to weather the storm and keep going despite the public’s lack of faith in his leadership and ardent desire to force him from office.

The media’s romance with Olmert began formally in late 2003, when he followed then-premier Ariel Sharon from the center-right to the far Left. Indeed, as Sharon abandoned his pledges to voters and adopted the platform of the defeated Labor Party of unilaterally withdrawing from Gaza, Olmert outflanked him from the Left.

Always a political pugilist, Olmert was eager to attack everyone who opposed Sharon’s withdrawal plan. He had no qualms about using rank demonization to attack his former political allies in the Likud.
It was Olmert’s newfound devotion to the platform of the far Left that won him the support of media heavies like Yediot Aharonot’s Nahum Barnea, Ma’ariv’s Ben Caspit and Channel 2’s Amnon Abramovich. They were more than happy to attack as delusional independent investigative reporter Yoav Yitzhak who broke nearly every corruption story regarding Olmert, beginning in 2005.

After four years of desultory, at best, probes between 2009 and 2012, Olmert was indicted in four separate cases on corruption charges. After he was acquitted of most of the charges in his first two trials, his media allies began a campaign to return him to politics. Only Olmert, they said, had a chance to defeat Netanyahu. None of the other leftist party heads had a shot.

But alas, Olmert was otherwise engaged, in his criminal defense. And now that he is a convicted felon, Olmert will never be able to return to politics.

Even his media friends have to cut their losses and find a new leader.

Sherman - Into the Fray: Something to worry about

Martin Sherman..
Into the Fray/JPost..
23 February '12..





Syria is not lost. Assad is Western educated and is not a religious man. He can still join a moderate grouping – Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, Haaretz, November 13, 2009

I fear that the appalling brutality we are witnessing in Homs, with heavy weapons firing into civilian neighborhoods, is a grim harbinger of things to come – UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, February 9, 2012

Seen against the backdrop of the carnage being perpetrated across Syria by the Assad regime, the magnitude of the misjudgment made by Gabi Ashkenazi, then the IDF’s chief of staff, is enough to make any self-respecting Israeli cringe with embarrassment.

None so blind

Askhenazi is not the only senior Israeli leader to articulate an appallingly inaccurate assessment of Israel’s adversaries, but in many ways his is a particularly interesting and instructive example. After all, before his appointment as chief of staff, much of his 40-year military career was spent in the IDF’s Northern Command, including as its commander. One must, therefore, presume that a large portion of his time was devoted to evaluating the Syrian threat, and to familiarizing himself with nature of the Syrian military dictatorship.

It is alarming to learn that despite the opportunity he had to gauge the true characteristics of the Syrian leader, his appraisal was so erroneous. The fact that Bashar Assad has a “Western education” – two years of medical specialization in the UK — and “is not a religious man” was somehow taken to indicate that he “can still join a moderate grouping” is at best disturbingly shallow.

As mentioned, Ashkenazi is not alone is espousing this sort of unsubstantiated nonsense.

Glick - Israel’s palace coup plotters

Caroline Glick
carolineglick.com
05 July '11

http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2011/07/israels-palace-coup-plotters.php


On Monday, saboteurs bombed the Egyptian gas pipeline to Israel for the third time since former president Hosni Mubarak was overthrown in February. The move was just another reminder that Israel today faces the most daunting and complex threat spectrum it has ever seen.

From Egypt to Turkey to Iran to the international Left to the Obama administration, Israel faces a mix of military and political challenges that threaten its very existence on multiple levels. To meet these challenges, it is vital for the government and people of Israel to stand strong, unified and determined. The approaching storm will test our resilience as we have never been tested before.

Unfortunately, even if the government is competent, and even if the nation stands strong, there is reason to fear that Israel will fail to successfully withstand the dangers gathering against it. Unelected, unrepresentative and irresponsible senior government officials are liable to take actions that undermine the government’s ability to protect the country and weaken the public’s morale and unity of purpose.

Over the past week, we received two reminders of how dire the situation is. The first reminder relates to institutional impediments to the government’s freedom of action in preventing Iran from fielding a nuclear arsenal.

Since the beginning of his first term as prime minister 15 years ago, Binyamin Netanyahu has consistently warned that the greatest dangers Israel faces stem from the forces of global jihad generally and the Iranian regime and its nuclear program specifically. After taking office for the second time in 2009, Netanyahu made blocking Iran’s rise to nuclear power his top priority. He ordered the heads of the Mossad and the IDF to prepare plans to attack Iran’s nuclear installations.

Last Friday, Haaretz reported that former Mossad chief Meir Dagan and former IDF chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi refused to obey his order. Rather than prepare strike plans, Dagan and Ashkenazi warned that such a strike would foment a regional war. That is, rather than do their jobs, they made excuses for failing to fulfill their duty to obey Israel’s elected leadership.

Not wanting to take them on directly, Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak decided to wait them out. Dagan and Ashkenazi were both set to finish their terms at the beginning of the year, and Netanyahu and Barak figured they could replace them with commanders who would abide by the government’s wishes. Specifically, Barak and Netanyahu believed that by replacing Ashkenazi with his deputy Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant, they would have a military leader willing and able to take on the central challenge of preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear power.

Five years of darkness for Gilad Shalit

Fresnozionism.org
26 May '11

Gilad Shalit’s fifth anniversary as a captive held incommunicado by Hamas will arrive next month. It is generally thought that he is in an underground bunker somewhere in Gaza. Hamas has not allowed him visits from the Red Cross, or to communicate with his family, in contravention of the Geneva Convention.

Former Israeli Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi said that it was almost impossible to use military force to free him:

Ashkenazi explained during an address at a business forum at Bar Ilan University, where he was awarded an honorary doctorate, that Hamas is hiding the young soldier in a way “that makes it almost impossible” for the IDF to find him.


“We do not know where he is,” Ashkenazi said.


“It must be admitted that we cannot use military force to release Shalit… It is my dream to see a helicopter landing at the Erez Crossing with [him] and I phone his parents to inform him that we have freed him,” Ashkenazi confided.

I can understand that he might be in a booby-trapped location such that even if the IDF knew where he was they would be unable to rescue him. But someone knows where he is. The IDF has sources in Gaza, and they have the ability to bring Hamas operatives out and question them. How can it be “almost impossible” to find him?

The former IDF chief said that if a military option could not be found to free the captive soldier, then Israel would have to admit that “a reasonable price” would have to be paid.

The ‘price’ won’t be ‘reasonable’. That’s the whole idea. The price will be that Israel meets one of the main demands of the Palestinian Arabs: it will ultimately release all Arab prisoners, no matter what they’ve done. Once an exchange like the one Hamas has proposed is made, the whole enterprise of arresting terrorists and confining them will fall apart.

[An aside: Ashkenazi's dilemma is not exhaustive. I wonder if the option of pressuring Hamas by threatening its leaders (and carrying out the threats if he is not released) has been tried. They are quite prepared to send compromised women, mentally handicapped teenagers and others on suicide missions, but are they really prepared to become martyrs themselves?]

Today, since Hamas has become a full partner in the Palestinian Authority, the PA has assumed responsibility for Shalit. Not only the leaders of Hamas, but those of the PA are responsible for the ongoing war crime that is Shalit’s cruel captivity. In fact Gilad’s parents sent a letter to the US Congress asking that PA funding be cut off until he is freed.

The official PA position, according to negotiator Nabil Shaath, seems to be that there is nothing wrong with continuing to hold Shalit hostage! It’s remarkable the way the world pretends that the PA is better than a bunch of gangsters, and keeps on paying them, training their army and providing them with weapons.

In September, these liars, terrorists and murderers will be asking the UN to help them take a chunk of the Jewish National Home and create a pretend state that will be a base for more terrorism and murder.

Why not remind UN delegates — not that it will change what these corrupt parasites do, but it might embarrass them a little — that they are legitimizing gangsters?

Here is a billboard that a young Israeli-American named Gal Sitty wants to put up facing UN headquarters in Manhattan:

Gal Sitty's billboard

Sitty has set up a site at which people can contribute to the campaign to set up the billboard. As of today (May 26) there are pledges for $4,696 out of the $10,000 needed.

If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.

Yoav Galant's depressing defeat

Caroline Glick
carolineglick.com
07 February '11

http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2011/02/yoav-galants-depressing-defeat.php

As the threats against Israel mount from all directions, the job of the IDF Chief of General Staff is becoming more challenging by the day.

First on the list of threats is Iran. While it is apparently true that the Stuxnet computer virus continues to wreak havoc on Iran's nuclear program, it is also true that Iran remains dedicated to moving forward, despite all obstacles.

Experts agree that within anywhere from a year to four years, if Iran is not stopped, it will become a nuclear power.

In addition to its nuclear weapons program, Iran continues to expand its web of influence and control over the region. Its newest colonial acquisition - Lebanon has now joined Gaza and Syria as an Iranian puppet.

Then there is Egypt. Iran's dictator-in-chief Ali Khamenei has spent the two weeks since the anti-regime protests began in Egypt bragging that the unrest shows Iran's star is rising. The "Islamic awakening" hearkened by the 1979 Iranian revolution is unfolding before our eyes, he says.

And there is a body of evidence which suggests that Khamenei is on to something. In an interview on the BBC's Persian service Sunday night, Kamal al-Halbavi, a senior member of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, expressed hope that Egypt will have "a good government, like the Iranian government, and a good president like Mr. [Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad, who is very brave."

On Sunday, Egyptian Vice President Omar Suleiman conducted talks with representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood. Thanks to the Obama administration's support for the Brotherhood, the outlawed Islamic totalitarian movement is now seen as a legitimate political force in the post- Mubarak Egypt.

The Obama administration's support for the group against Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak points to the third great security challenge facing Israel today. The IDF will now have to develop a fighting doctrine that takes account of the US's apparent abandonment of strategic reason.

POLITICAL DEVELOPMENTS in Egypt, as well as the sabotage of the natural gas pipeline from Egypt to Israel at el-Arish, show that the southern front is active again after 30 years. The IDF needs to prepare for the possibility of a conventional war in the south and the north. It will have to relearn how to fight a war in the desert. New weapons systems will have to be developed and procured. Troops will have to receive expanded training.

The regular army will have to be vastly expanded. The military budget will have to increase massively. Intelligence assets, already stretched, will have to be significantly augmented and adapted to meet new challenges.

In short, the ways the IDF thinks about war, plans for war, arms for war, trains for war and wages war are all going to have to change.

In light of these awesome challenges, the IDF's next chief of general staff will have to have the attitude of a revolutionary as he guides the IDF through massive change, and commands it in complex and perhaps existential battles.

Unfortunately, chances that such a commander will arise received a blow last week when Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein decided to force the government to cancel its decision to appoint Maj. Gen. Yoav Galant to replace outgoing Chief of Gen. Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi next Tuesday.

Galant was the commander that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak wished to see lead the IDF at this time. With his reputation for fearlessness, innovation and determination to win wars, Galant's appointment seemed like a reasonable one.

This was particularly true in the face of Ashkenazi's obvious aversion to the use of force. Ashkenazi has taken great pride in his consistent refusal to prepare the IDF to launch a preemptive strike against Iran's nuclear facilities against the expressed wishes of Netanyahu and Barak.

Ashkenazi upholds his command of the IDF during Operation Cast Lead as a textbook case of the effective use of limited force. The veracity of this claim is an open question. In the event, Ashkenazi sent half the army into Gaza and when they left, they left without Gilad Schalit. Moreover, they left with Hamas still firmly in charge of the international border with Egypt.

The depth of Ashkenazi's involvement in the campaign to discredit Galant and torpedo his appointment is unknown although it is clear that he did play a role in galvanizing the campaign against Galant at least initially. People close to the General Staff insist that Ashkenazi's determination to scupper Galant's appointment, like Barak's decision to shorten Ashkenazi's tenure, was motivated by personal rivalries and animosity. Strategic issues played at best a secondary role.

The case against Galant has nothing to do with his military talents. Galant apparently took control of state land around his homestead on Moshav Amikam without authorization. To be sure, this was wrong.

[Confused identity] COS Ashkenazi support deal with Assad - appears to trust him

Dr. Aaron Lerner
IMRA
15 November 09

Dr. Aaron Lerner - IMRA

Pop quiz: Who is Gabi Ashkenazi?

(1) A Kadima back bencher in the Knesset who previously served in a high position in the IDF?

(2) An analyst in the Foreign Ministry?

(3) Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff

Let's look at the argument Gabi Ashkenazi raises for making a deal with Assad:

"We should not be disheartened by Assad," he said during private conversations. The defense establishment has been steadily in favor of resuming talks with Syria. A source present in meetings where Ashkenazi spoke said that the chief of staff explained that "Israel has a strategic interest in disassociating Syria from the extremist axis that Iran is leading."

"Syria is not lost," Ashkenazi declared. "Assad is western educated and is not a religious man. He can still join a moderate grouping."

Is this military analysis?

No.

It's at best the kind of pop-psychology that might be acceptable in the working paper of some junior analyst at the Foreign Ministry.

But it has absolutely nothing to do with his area of expertise.

And so here is the real question to lose sleep over: Will the fact that Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi apparently thinks that handing over the Golan to Assad will make him a "moderate" and not consider attacking Israel ever in the future, influence the analysis that he actually is being paid to do: analyze the efficacy of security arrangements being considered in the course of diplomatic discussions regarding the Golan?

Because if when Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi prepares the analysis he is thinking at the same time that Syria will never attack if we would hand over the Golan he might be tempted to tinker with the analysis in order to insure that Israeli security demands don't get in the way of "peace in our time."

Impossible?

Hardly.

Consider all the brass who signed off on absurd security arrangements under Oslo.]
.