Showing posts with label Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Show all posts

Friday, March 22, 2013

The Ministry of Extraneous Affairs by Mordechai Kedar

Dr. Mordechai Kedar..
Middle East and Terrorism..
22 March '13..

I begin with a full disclosure: a few months ago the Ministry of Foreign Affairs sent me to an Asian country to advise its government in understanding a difficult matter regarding the Islamic population of that state, and how to deal with this matter. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs organized the event perfectly, in both the professional and logistical aspects, and the Israeli ambassador of that state personally accompanied me in my meetings with the local professionals.

These days, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is preparing a promotional film on Israel, and in the leading role is Bar Rafaeli, whose participation in the film arouses a wave of objection, because she did not serve in the military. Some official sources also objected, especially the IDF itself, because her participation in an official film produced by the state of Israel could be interpreted as sending a message of leniency towards people who have not served in the IDF. These days, when "sharing the burden equally" has become a political mantra on the level of "It is better to die than commit certain sins", the IDF expects the Ministry of Foreign Affairs not to act in a way that whitewashes the evasion of military service in the IDF. But it seems that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs does not think it's a problem.

This case - in my view - is an indication of the way too many people in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs think. The employees of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are public servants, not appointed by the minister, and most are graduates of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' cadet's course. This was supposed to provide the state of Israel with a working staff that is professional and relevant, and executes the decisions of the government professionally and faithfully, and without dispute.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs Reflects an Obsolete Social Model

In fact, the reality is totally different. The social profile of workers in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is fairly suitable to the model of the "Akhusalim" - coined by the sociologist Prof. Baruch Kimmerling, who described the state of Israel of the 1970s as being governed by an elite group of people who were Ashkenazim (Jews of European descent), secular, members of the old guard, socialist, and nationalist, forming the Hebrew acronym Akhusal. In general, one can say that the political, social, diplomatic and cultural agenda of the staff of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs resembles that of the Labor party (and perhaps also Meretz) much more than it resembles that of the Likud, despite the fact that since 1977 there have been more than a few governments led by the Likud. The proportion of religious, ultra-Orthodox, and Arabs who are staff members of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is significantly lower than their proportional representation in the population of the state of Israel.

As a result of this, Avigdor Leiberman, a minister from the Right, found it difficult to impose his political agenda on his subordinates because of the simple reason that he could not appoint staff that suited him. The political echelon (the prime minister and minister of foreign affairs) can appoint no more than eleven people in the ministry, from the level of ambassador to the person who serves tea, and a minister who cannot place his people in key positions will find it difficult to control what is done in the ministry. My sense is that Leiberman was "persona non grata" in the eyes of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs staff.

Saturday, February 16, 2013

Needed - Intellectual warriors, not slicker diplomats

...the function of diplomacy – particularly public diplomacy – is akin to the traditional function of the air force. For just as the classic role of the air force is to provide ground forces the necessary freedom of action to attain their objectives, so the classic role of diplomacy is to provide national policy- makers the freedom of action they require to attain the objectives of that policy.


Martin Sherman..
Into the Fray/JPost..
14 February '13..




War is a continuation of politics by other means. – Carl von Clausewitz, On War, 1832

Politics is war conducted by other means. – David J. Horowitz, The Art of Political War, 2000

Frederick the Great, who reigned as king of Prussia (1740-1786), famously remarked that “Diplomacy without arms is like music without instruments.” Today, over two centuries later, it would appear this relationship has been entirely reversed, and that “Arms without diplomacy is like music without instruments.”

Arms without diplomacy

In a recent opinion piece (Jerusalem Post, January 7) titled “Why Jews are so bad at PR,” Shmuley Boteach asks, with evident exasperation, “What good is having Apache helicopter gunships, or Merkava tanks, to defend your citizens against attack if you can’t even use them because the world thinks you’re always the aggressor?”

The last several weeks have seen a spate of similar articles, berating the dismal and dysfunctional performance of Israel’s public diplomacy – reflecting, one hopes, growing public discontent at the deplorable state of affairs that has prevailed in this sphere for decades.

Regrettably, it appears that these – richly deserved – rebukes have been largely limited to the nation’s English-language press. A Google search I conducted on major Hebrew media outlets showed that far less attention seems to be allotted to discussion and analysis of this critically important component of Israel’s strategic capabilities – revealing what appears to be an alarming lack of awareness of, and/or interest in, the topic among the Hebrew-reading public.

Difficult to overstate the gravity

It is difficult to overstate the gravity of Israel’s public diplomacy debacle, and to grasp the ongoing official disregard of the strategic dangers that its continued neglect is creating.

Indeed, well over half a decade ago, in an article called “Public diplomacy: the missing component in Israel’s foreign policy,” published in a well-known scholarly journal, Prof. Eytan Gilboa issued the following ominous warning: “The lack of an adequate PD [public diplomacy] program has significantly affected Israel’s strategic outlook and freedom of action.... Any further neglect of PD would not only restrict Israel’s strategic options, it would be detrimental to its ability to survive in an increasingly intolerant and hostile world.”

While nearly all the recently published critiques did a good job in their diagnosis of the malaise, I fear the prescriptions many of them suggested for its remedy are hopelessly inadequate, and reflect a serious underestimation of the depth and the scale of the problem.

Thursday, January 10, 2013

‘Next year in Palestine’

Martin Woker
Yisrael Medad/Eli Pollak..
Media Comment/JPost..
09 January '13..

“Next year in Palestine” was the largest headline on the first page of the Swiss Neue Zuericher Zeitung (NZZ), which appeared in the December 29/30 edition of the paper.

The article, written by Martin Woker, an editor of the paper, is not overly friendly to Israel, to say the least. Arguably, the headline itself is a masterpiece of yellow journalism with an anti-Semitic flavor, which has little respect for the feeling of Jews.

For two millennia, the Jewish people have fervently wished for themselves to be “next year in Jerusalem.” The saying expresses the deepest wishes of the Jewish people, who after having been thrown out of the Temple and Jerusalem, prayed and beseeched the Almighty to turn the wheel of history backwards and bring the Jewish people once again into the promised land. Generations of families have instilled in their children the hope that one day they all will be able to return to Jerusalem.

Woker had no regard for these deep feelings, for, after all who cares when a Jew is upset? They misused this saying to express their deep hope that next year there will be Palestinian state whose capital is in Jerusalem.

Woker begins his article with an “objective” description of Israel’s construction program, utilizing the birth of Jesus tale: “Maria and Joseph would not have had to find refuge in a greater Jerusalem pigsty nowadays. There are thousands of apartments under construction or in the planning stages, to the north and east of Bethlehem. The Israeli government is facing harsh criticism from all over the world since these are on occupied Palestinian territory and are limited to Jewish inhabitants only.”

The article goes on to describe the changes taking place in the Middle East and ends with: “Not every struggle for human rights must end in war, as one may learn from the South African example. Accordingly, no one can predict that all the new buildings in Greater Jerusalem will forever be available only to those who today take into consideration only themselves and their ethnically and divinely justified eternal right. It should be clear: God has also lit in the Holy land the spark of unrest of the Orient.”

ISRAEL’S SWISS friends were justifiably upset.

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Plosker - How the Mavi Marmara Sank Israel’s Public Diplomacy

Simon Plosker..
The Times of Israel..
13 June '12..

That State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss report into the Mavi Marmara flotilla incident has pointed to a severe shortfall in Israel’s public diplomacy comes as no surprise.

For those of us involved in Israeli public diplomacy in the non-governmental sector, the weaknesses were only too apparent at the time. For hours after the news broke, we were glued to Internet sites, Israeli TV and international news stations. Conflicting casualty reports were thrown around and the only thing that was clear in the confusion was that Israel was facing a potential catastrophe from a PR perspective, not to mention the other ramifications.

Thursday, May 27, 2010

MFA legal expert Sarah Weiss Maudi on the legal aspects of Gaza aid


IMRA
Sarah Weiss Maudi
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
26 May '10

A maritime blockade has been imposed by Israel off the coast of Gaza because Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza.

Transcript:

Interviewer: Today we are with Sarah Weiss Maudi. She is the Israel Foreign Ministry's expert on maritime and humanitarian law. Sarah, we would like to ask you a few questions about Gaza. First of all, why is it that Israel can prevent ships from reaching Gaza?



Ms. Weiss Maudi: The reason why ships can't come into Gaza currently is because a maritime blockade is currently in effect off the coast of Gaza. Such a blockade has been imposed by Israel because Israel is currently in a state of armed conflict with the Hamas regime that controls Gaza. Hamas has repeatedly bombed civilian targets in Israel proper with weapons that have been smuggled into Gaza by various routes, including the sea. Under international maritime law, when a maritime blockade is in effect, no vessels can enter the blockaded area. That includes both civilian vessels and enemy vessels. Any vessel that violates or attempts to violate the maritime blockade may be captured or even attacked. Maritime blockades are a legitimate and recognized measure under international law, and may be implemented as part of an armed conflict at sea.

Interviewer: So this is a recognized maritime practice?

Ms. Weiss Maudi: Exactly. Various naval manuals, including the naval manuals of the US and UK recognize the maritime blockade as an effective naval measure that can be implemented in times of armed conflict. And those manuals give various criteria for making a blockade valid, including the requirement to give due notice of the blockade. Israel, in accordance with the requirements of international law, has publicized the existence of the blockade currently in effect and has published the exact coordinates of the blockade via the accepted international professional maritime channels.

Interviewer: Okay. So this blockade should not surprise anyone.

Ms. Weiss Maudi: Exactly.

Interviewer: Now, let's talk about the transfer of supplies over land. Why can Israel decide what goes in and what can't?

(Read full interview)

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.
.