PM Netanyahu’s bold move - by Ruthie Blum

The Israeli right is wrong to see the prime minister’s deal with the UAE as a capitulation to foreign pressure. He is creating optimal conditions for the Jewish state’s road ahead.

Ruthie Blum..
JNS.org..
18 August '20..

Anyone wondering what had become of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ostensible July 1 target date to begin the process of extending sovereignty over the Jordan Valley and the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria received an answer last Thursday.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement on Aug. 13 that Washington had brokered a peace agreement between Israel and the United Arab Emirates—and accompanying reports that the deal precluded “annexation of the West Bank”—put the question to rest.

Once it emerged that Netanyahu had been busy for the past few weeks negotiating the terms of the treaty with Trump and Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, his sudden silence on sovereignty became clear. Ironically, the weekly protests outside of the Israeli premier’s official residence on Balfour Street in Jerusalem included the chanting of slogans and waving of banners decrying his “annexation” plans.

The cessation of these plans—derived from the “Peace to Prosperity” vision that Trump unveiled at the White House on Jan. 28—have not assuaged the anti-Netanyahu camp, however. The demonstrators in the capital and elsewhere across the country have other bones of contention to keep their Woodstock-like festivals going.

What they consider to be the prime minister’s poor handling of the current so-called “second wave” of the coronavirus crisis is one such issue. Another is his heading of the government while under indictment for corruption. Calling him “crime minister,” they scream and shout that he should resign.

Never mind that they have been complaining about his reluctance to open the economy completely while gathering in massive numbers and huddling together, many without masks, as though Health Ministry warnings and regulations don’t apply to them.

Forget about the fact that Netanyahu not only was re-elected to head the Likud Party in a democratic primary, and that his remaining at the helm is the result of democratic Knesset elections and coalition-building.

Leave aside the fact that he, like every other Israeli citizen, is innocent until proven guilty. The loud crowds urging his ouster are angry at their lot and hold him responsible for it.

It is natural for an anxiety-ridden population with an uncertain financial future and bleak present to blame its leader. People all over the world are doing just that, accusing their governments of failing to prevent COVID-19 deaths on the one hand and of killing the economy on the other.

Netanyahu, thus, is in good company. But he possesses abilities that few of his counterpart heads of state can match. The deal that he reached with the UAE is but one example among many. His engaging in political clashes while managing a low-intensity conflict against Hamas in Gaza and launching repeated mini-strikes on Iranian facilities is another.

The two are connected, and not only because the Sunni Gulf states now see in Israel a staunch ally in their mutual battle against the mullah-led Shi’ite regime in Tehran, but due to Netanyahu’s knowledge that holding off on his promised sovereignty moves would arouse the ire of many of his supporters, without gaining him any brownie points from his detractors—at least not those on either side of the Israeli spectrum.

Indeed, none of the current protesters will stay home next weekend,

(Continue to Full Column)

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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

BDS: Bibi Derangement Syndrome in the Age of Corona - by Victor Rosenthal

If there is one theme that PM Netanyahu’s opponents are banging away at – and that includes not just his political opposition, but most of the mainstream media in Israel and a small army on social media – it is that he is “destroying democracy,” or even trying to turn Israel into a dictatorship. If you don’t believe me, just google “Israel democracy Netanyahu” and you will get pages and pages of the same old … stuff.

Victor Rosenthal..
Abu Yehuda..
22 March '20..
Link: http://abuyehuda.com/2020/03/bibi-derangement-in-the-age-of-corona/

Democracy, in the broadest sense of the term, means that the citizens of a state determine its policies by voting. Usually they vote for representatives to run things according to their understanding of what’s best for everyone, like parliaments or senators and congressmen, prime ministers or presidents. They grant these representatives power for a limited period of time, and then review their performance by holding elections.

Different countries have developed different systems for doing this, and some are better than others. Israel has a system of proportional representation by political party, which has some theoretical advantages but one big disadvantage: it doesn’t work. We have had three elections in about one year and none of them has enabled the formation of a government coalition.

The system is what is preventing us from having a functional democracy, not Bibi Netanyahu. Netanyahu’s Likud party got a plurality of seats in the Knesset, although no one party ever gets a majority. His bloc, which means the Likud plus some religious and right-wing parties is short of a majority, too. So why doesn’t the opposition have a majority? Because it has two parts: the part composed of the Blue and White party and a few other parties on the (more or less) Zionist Left, and the part which is the 15 seats held by anti-Zionist Arab parties.

Not one of the Arab legislators will agree that Israel should be a Jewish state in any sense of the word. The most moderate would prefer it to be a “state of its citizens” like the USA, for example. The slightly less moderate would like it to become a binational state, while the rest are Islamists, or Palestinian or pan-Arab nationalists. I like to think that the political forces that produced them are not an expression of the true attitudes of Israel’s Arab citizens, but I’m not sure.

Most of Blue and White’s leaders could not bring themselves to include the Arab parties in the coalition (would you?), but apparently they are not averse to forming a minority government that depends on their votes. Our system allows a coalition of a minority of the members of the Knesset, as long as they don’t lose a vote of confidence.

This would mean that the Arab parties would have a veto over all the actions of the government. Given their ideologies, that is unacceptable. And at least three members of the opposition agree with me, so this will not happen. There is a law, by the way, that says that someone who “[negates] the existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state” can’t sit in the Knesset, but the Supreme Court has prevented its application to Arabs.

The other alternative is to form a unity government in which the leaders of the two major parties would take turns at being Prime Minister. That is the direction we are going now, and they are negotiating terms – who will fill the various ministerial slots, who will be PM first and for how long, and so on.

PM Netanyahu, Mandelblit, the media and the fate of Israeli democracy - by Caroline Glick

The Israeli establishment has long sought to destroy Netanyahu, the only political leader in Israeli history who was never a member of their club and never sought their approval. They haven’t been able to defeat him at the ballot box and now they have placed their hopes in the politicized state prosecution. If Mandelblit chooses to make their dream a reality, he will not merely get rid of Netanyahu. He will criminalize routine politics and so end Israeli democracy while replacing our political leaders with unelected prosecutors who have richly demonstrated their lack of objectivity and contempt for the public.

Caroline Glick..
Carolineglick.com..
20 October '19..
Link: http://carolineglick.com/netanyahu-the-media-and-the-fate-of-israeli-democracy/

The ongoing criminal probes against Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyhahu are reaching their climax. After conducting a marathon four-day pre-indictment hearing for Netanyahu earlier this month, Israel’s Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit reportedly intends to complete his review of the state prosecution’s cases and decide whether to indict Israel’s longest-serving prime minister by the end of next month. The main charges against Netanyahu relate to his associations with media owners.

For three years, illegal leaks from the investigations have dominated the news. The key question – indeed, just about the only question – that has been endlessly discussed is whether or not Mandelblit will end Netanyahu’s political career by indicting him on corruption charges.

The importance of this question is self-evident. On the one hand we have a democratically elected leader. On the other hand, we have unelected state prosecutors who wish to oust him from power by indicting him.

For nearly a year, Israeli politics have been in a state of chaos because of the criminal probes. The probes played a central role in the April Knesset elections and arguably were the primary reason that Netanyahu failed to form a coalition despite his electoral victory. Today the probes and Mandelblit’s deliberations are the primary reason that no one can form a government in the wake of last month’s repeat elections. If Israel holds a third election in the coming months, the probes will again be the central issue determining both the result and the ability of whoever wins to form a government. The center-left Blue and White party is using the probes as an excuse to refuse to join a coalition government with Netanyahu.

While the probes’ impact on Netanyahu’s political future is a key question, and on the composition of the next government is certainly a big deal, neither of these issues is the central matter than hangs in the balance as Mandelblit holds his deliberations.

If Israel’s Attorney General relies on these probes as a means to end Netanyahu’s career, he will do far more than overthrow a political leader. He will embrace a legal doctrine that rejects the very essence of democracy.

PM Netanyahu’s carrot-and-stick policy on Gaza - by Ruthi Blum

What’s clear at this moment, though, is that anyone accusing Netanyahu of “having no policy” is either in denial or just dead wrong.

Ruthi Blum..
JNS.org..
20 August '19..

Of all the criticism lobbed at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu these days, the claim that he has been exercising restraint towards the terrorists in Gaza to distract from his legal battles and guarantee victory in the fast-approaching Sept. 17 Knesset elections is the most ridiculous. As any member of the Israeli public and political echelon is keenly aware, the one thing that should worry Netanyahu’s opponents is a war.

This is particularly true today, when Israeli residents of the Gaza-border communities—the “envelope” around the Hamas-ruled enclave—are suffering from an understandable mixture of fatigue and fury. Traumatized by living under daily threat of death and destruction with only minimal respite between rockets, riots and incendiary balloons will do that. Especially considering the fact that while Palestinian children in Gaza attend summer camps where they learn how to kill Jews, the Israeli kids on the other side of the fence spend their vacation listening for Red Alert sirens telling them to take cover in the nearest bomb shelter.

That the politicians to the right of Netanyahu’s ruling Likud Party have been shouting about a lack of Israeli deterrence makes perfect sense. Though only a handful of such candidates believes in reoccupying Gaza—and the rest don’t really have a viable plan other than applying even more Israeli firepower in the ongoing battle of attrition—all of those running on right-wing tickets are telling the electorate that Netanyahu, whose re-election is the only shot they have at being players in the next government, needs a fierce hawkish push.

But those to the left of Netanyahu also are accusing him of being weak in the face of Palestinian violence. This is not merely hypocritical. It is evidence that even much of the so-called “peace camp” is trying to attract voters who see no chance for peace in the foreseeable future, with or without the soon-to-be-unveiled White House plan.

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

A left turn? Actually, there's nothing new about Avigdor Liberman - by Dr. Aaron Lerner

Last night PM Netanyahu charged that Avigdor Liberman is "now" part of the left after forcing snap elections for the second time. In truth - Liberman has ALWAYS been left! Here is something I wrote over two years ago:

Dr. Aaron Lerner..
IMRA..
30 May '19..
Link: http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=73518





Weekly Commentary: Liberman Consistent: Border Inferior to pre- '67, 3rd
Party-Based Security, Multiple Sovereignties
Dr. Aaron Lerner 15 March, 2017

There's nothing new about Minister of Defense Avigdor Liberman's positions.

From the very start of his political career he has advocated:

#1. Redrawing Israel's borders to remove large Arab communities. The resulting lines would be militarily inferior to the terrible pre-'67 border. While Liberman promises the move would dramatically reduce the Arab population inside Israel this assertion ignores that the affected Israeli Arabs could opt to change their official place of residence to a location remaining inside Israel and/or successfully challenge their unilateral loss of Israeli citizenship in the Supreme Court.

#2. Relying on third parties for security. In his 2004 book, "My Truth" he proposed that Jordanian and Egyptian security forces take responsibility for the West Bank and Gaza Strip respectively. Later he proposed that NATO forces be deployed.

#3. The West Bank and Gaza Strip not being within a non-Israeli sovereignty envelope. Again - either Jordan and Egypt or simply Palestinian sovereignty.

Each of these key features of Liberman's positions is radically different from those of the national camp in general and Binyamin Netanyahu in particular.

Why Israel Reelects Netanyahu - by Judith Bergman

Foreign observers of the Israeli elections have failed to realize that almost all Israelis, more than 25 years after the disaster of Oslo, know that the so-called ‘two-state solution’ would be Israel’s ‘final solution’. They do not see in Netanyahu as a perfect leader but they vote for him because no other recent Israeli leader has been able to create so many victories for Israel.

Judith Bergman..
MiDA..
15 April '19..

While President Donald Trump was among the first to congratulate Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on winning the Israeli elections, as did Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Cypriot President Nicos Anastasiades and Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, among others, the large and most powerful countries of the European Union, France, UK and Germany held back.

Perhaps they were waiting for the next Israeli government to be formed first. Perhaps it was just hard for them to congratulate someone with whom they so intensely disagree on Middle East policy. These three countries, after all, dictate policy in the EU, an organization whose foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, recently participated in the meeting of the Arab league, where she declared, “The first point, the first top issue on our respective agenda: Israel and Palestine. We need to continue to work together very closely, because we share the same sense of priority, the same sense of urgency, the same concerns and the same objectives: to get back to meaningful negotiations towards the two-state solution, which is the only viable, realistic solution”. She also strongly reassured the Arab League, “And you know that you can count on the European Union on the Palestinian issue. We share exactly the same views and it is vital in this moment that we work together on this”.

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

Sovereignty. Why It Is So Important That Bibi Did Not Speak Of Annexing Judea And Samaria - by Varda Meyers Epstein

Sovereignty brings a new note into the conversation about Judea and Samaria, a topic that has grown in importance, as Jews have begun to tiptoe into new waters, experimenting with the word “indigenous.”

Varda Meyers Epstein..
Judean Rose/Elder of Ziyon..
10 April '19..

“Annexation” is a word I’ve fought against for years. Especially as applied to Judea and Samaria. You annex land that doesn’t belong to you. If it belongs to you, on the other hand, you exercise your sovereignty and say, “This is ours.”

Getting this message across has been difficult. People find it easier to speak of annexation. Fewer syllables or something. They don’t realize the import of what they’re suggesting when they use the “a” word. If I call them on it, they tell me I’m quibbling, that it’s just semantics.

That is why I was beyond ecstatic when Netanyahu, in an interview with Army Radio on Saturday night, clarified that he was not speaking of annexation. “I did not say I would annex the West Bank,” said Netanyahu, “I said I would apply Israeli law to Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria.”

In a later television interview (Hebrew only), the Prime Minister did one better, using the word "sovereignty."



It is true he was saying these things on the eve of an election, so such declarations could be seen in that light, as so much campaign smoke. On the other hand, this is the first time a sitting prime minister, or anyone in a position of authority in an Israeli government referred to exercising sovereignty in the territories. It was the first time a sitting prime minister declared that there is no need to annex Judea and Samaria, because they are already ours. The same prime minister who commissioned the Edmond Levy Report was at last utilizing that report, a report which found that Israel has a legal right to the territories that are Judea and Samaria.

(Continue to Full Post)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

The need to highlight Gantz’s terrible military record even though Netanyahu approved his appointment - by Dr. Aaron Lerner

...Many voters don't think that the contours of an agreement with the Palestinians are relevant when choosing a party since in any case there won't be a deal for the foreseeable future. So whether Blue White is "Left" or not on Arab-Israeli affairs may not matter to these voters. But they most certainly may be deterred from casting their ballot for a party headed by a man who consistently screwed up in key military roles.

Dr. Aaron Lerner..
IMRA Weekly Commentary..
06 March '19..
Link: http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=73467

Bennie Gantz’s military career was torn to shreds in a feature article in the magazine section last Friday’s edition of the left wing Haaretz.

Haaretz pulled no punches, starting with details of how Gantz screwed up on his year long assignment to prepare for then PM Ehud Barak’s chaotic retreat for Lebanon and concluding with his fiasco in failing to prepare the IDF, as Chief of Staff, to deal with the Hamas assault tunnels reaching across from the Gaza Strip.

Senior IDF sources are quoted observing that Gantz consistently doesn't plan ahead and declines to consider worse case scenarios.

Again. This wasn't in right wing Makor Rishon or B'Sheva. It was in Haaretz.

One would think that Gantz's dismal military record would be the focus of the Likud as it pushes back against the rival Blue White party he heads that now polls more seats than Likud.

Instead Likud attacks Blue White for being "Left".

Yes. It is Left. But you need at least a 15 second attention span reading their platform to understand that. And that's 10 seconds more than Israelis typically are either willing or able to invest.

So why isn't Likud citing Gantz's screw ups, failures that are so graphic in their nature that even a 5 second attention span can comprehend them?

The famous “Three D’s” of the Netanyahu Witch Hunt - by Victor Rosenthal

Netanyahu has been Prime Minister since 2009, and his opposition is frustrated to the point of hysteria. They have been unable to defeat him by the normal political processes, so it seems that they have chosen to tie him down with multiple legal threads, as the Lilliputians did to Gulliver, and stone him to death with innuendos. Bibi claims, and I think he is essentially correct in this, that pressure from media and the legal establishment – groups that are largely opposed to him – forced the hand of the Attorney General in deciding to move forward toward indictment...Will they succeed? We’ll find out after the 9th of April.

Victor Rosenthal..
Abu Yehuda..
03 March '19..
Link: http://abuyehuda.com/2019/03/the-netanyahu-witch-hunt/

Demonization, double standard, and delegitimization: the famous “Three D’s” proposed by Natan Sharansky in 2004 have proven to be a powerful tool to distinguish between legitimate criticism of Israel, and “new antisemitism,” in which the Jewish state replaces the individual Jew as a target.

What these criteria do is reveal the irrational basis of the exaggerated charges against Israel, and help show how they are part of an emotional propaganda attack aimed at creating a strong antipathy in the listener which is not justified by facts.

These same propaganda techniques can be deployed in other venues for other purposes, such as in an attempt to damage a democratically elected political leader and influence an election. In a situation like this, the Three D’s can help us distinguish between legitimate criticism of policies and behavior – even alleged criminal behavior – and a witch hunt.

Of course I am talking about the witch hunt against PM Binyamin Netanyahu.

***

The major complaint against Netanyahu today is that he is corrupt, as is charged in the three cases in which the Attorney General has said he will attempt to indict Netanyahu: accepting gifts of cigars and champagne in return for political favors, conspiring to obtain positive coverage from a newspaper in return for suppressing a competitor, and – most damaging – promoting regulatory actions that provided financial benefits for a media mogul in return for positive coverage on a website he controlled.

There are some serious problems for the prosecution in these cases. The first case is both trivial and vague (how many cigars is too many?) In the second, Netanyahu is supposed to have traded support for legislation to ban the free distribution of newspapers – a bill aimed at Israel Hayom – for positive coverage from the publisher of its competitor, Yediot Aharonot. But Netanyahu opposed the legislation, and Yediot didn’t support him anyway. In the third, the website that allegedly provided positive coverage did publish several favorable articles, but overall did not change its slant.

In addition, all three accusations are based to some extent on the testimony of state’s witnesses – people who have been given immunity from prosecution for their own illegal actions in return for their testimony against the Prime Minister. Testify the way we want, they are told, or you will go to jail! Could there be a greater conflict of interest?

But what I find the most egregious is the way the media – with the cooperation of the police and the prosecutor’s office – has been trying Netanyahu in public for at least the last three or four years, in order to demonize and delegitimize him as Prime Minister. Netanyahu has been interrogated by the police at least twelve times for hours at a time in various cases, and each time there were sensational leaks that were gleefully reported on the evening TV news or in the next days’ papers. Naturally, the reports stressed the most incriminating material. As far as I know, no one has been disciplined for these leaks.

Bibi's Indictment and the Future of Israeli Democracy - by Prof. Avi Bell

The Attorney General’s misguided decision to charge the Prime Minister with bribery and breach of trust may spell trouble for the future of Israeli democracy

Prof. Avi Bell..
Tablet Magazine..
28 February '19..

Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit’s announcement to the media, 40 days before general elections, that he intends to indict Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on charges of bribery and breach of trust in three different cases was political drama of the highest order. There’s no gainsaying the importance to Israel’s politics and the election. But more importantly, Mandelblit’s announcement heralds a crisis for Israel’s democracy and the public image of its legal system.

Mandelblit’s announcement inserts law enforcement officials into the political arena in an unprecedented way, and on a very shaky legal foundation. If the legal theories that the attorney general is introducing against Netanyahu become general law, a considerable part of the democratic life of Israel will have to pass through police interrogation rooms. If they remain restricted to Netanyahu, the partisanship will permanently damage public trust in the Israeli legal system.

To be sure, Mandelblit’s announcement is only an interim step in the legal drama. Any actual indictment will have to wait for hearings in the attorney general’s office in which Netanyahu’s lawyers will be afforded the opportunity to attempt to dissuade Mandelblit from his chosen course. The hearings will take place after the election, and only in a year or so will Mandelblit be in a position to request that the Knesset lift Netanyahu’s immunity or formally file an indictment. And the political fallout will not end with the opinion polls now being conducted. It is likely that Mandelblit’s announcement will influence not only the number of votes received by the parties on April 9, but the coalition negotiations to follow.

Yet, while the ultimate political fallout remains unclear, the danger in the novel legal theories introduced by Mandelblit is stark. The criminal charges against the prime minister lack legal substance, and they threaten both the rule of law in Israel and the health of its democracy. Professor Alan Dershowitz said as much in several op-eds and an open letter to Mandelblit in recent months, and he is absolutely right.

(Continue to Full Article)

Avi Bell is a Professor of Law at Bar Ilan University and the University of San Diego, a Senior Fellow at the Kohelet Policy Forum, and a Visiting Fellow at Harvard Law School’s Project on the Foundations of Private Law.

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

Abbas’s soaring popularity alters Israel’s political landscape - by Joanthan S. Tobin

Israeli voters will keep rejecting peace plans as long as Palestinian keep cheering for terrorists and their paymasters.

Jonathan S. Tobin..
JNS.org..
25 February '19..

It was a rough week for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He saw his main opponents join forces and the Blue and White Party that resulted from this merger surpassed Netanyahu’s Likud Party in the polls. If that wasn’t enough, Netanyahu’s decision to encourage one of his coalition partners to take in a party whose leaders are followers of the late Rabbi Meir Kahane set off a storm of criticism from Jews who felt he was wrong to help legitimize an extremist group.

But while Netanyahu has been taking it on the chin, the man that much of the world still imagines is Israel’s peace partner seems to have had a very good week. And the explanation for that unexpected development is the reason why Netanyahu’s prospects for holding on to his office are not quite as gloomy as his detractors may think.

Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas is currently serving the 15th year of the four-year term as president of the P.A., to which he was elected in January 2005. He is widely reviled by most of those whom he pretends to serve. The same is true for his steadfast refusal to negotiate peace with Israel. The kleptocracy over which the 83-year-old presides is a disgrace. He refuses to make peace with Israel, but is also dependent on security cooperation with the Jewish state.

But Abbas’s popularity is suddenly soaring. In the last year, both the United States and Israel have enacted measures to cut back on cash flowing to his regime in order to force him to end the practice of rewarding those who attack, wound and kill Israelis, Jews and Americans with salaries and pensions.

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

Very Classy. Using a Moshe Arens Obituary to Bash Bibi - by Sean Durns

...The Post’s gratuitous jab at Netanyahu was, of course, meant to demean the Israeli prime minister. At first glance, a single line in a larger article might not mean much. But the decision to belittle Bibi in another man’s obituary is quite revealing. It showcases how deeply ingrained The Washington Post’s anti-Netanyahu bias is. The paper simply can’t resist an opportunity to take a punch at him.

Sean Durns..
Algemeiner..
17 January '19..

Newspapers typically publish obituaries of famous figures in order to sum up their life’s work. The Washington Post, however, used an obituary to belittle Israel’s prime minister. In so doing, the newspaper not only discarded decorum and decency, but illustrated how deep its biases go.

Moshe Arens, a former Israeli politician, died at the age of 93 on January 7, 2019. By any measure, Arens was a legendary figure, serving three times as defense minister and once as foreign minister. He was, as The New York Times reported, an influential ambassador to the US who “proved adept at making Israel’s case in the United States and came to be valued by Reagan administration officials as an Israeli government insider.”

An aeronautical engineer turned statesman, Arens was “one of the longest-surviving members of Israel’s founding generation,” the paper said — even seeking the premiership.

As The Algemeiner noted, Arens “was current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s primary mentor in the 1980s,” and helped “pave the way for Netanyahu’s rise to political power.” The Washington Post, however, chose to phrase this part of Arens’ biography differently, writing: “Mr. Arens’s most enduring political legacy is probably his role in launching the career of Netanyahu, a charismatic furniture salesman — and family friend — whom Mr. Arens hired as his No. 2 after being appointed ambassador to the United States.”

Readers unfamiliar with Israeli history — which, if one is open to a charitable interpretation, might include Washington Post obituary writers as well — might think that Arens just plucked a furniture salesman out of the blue. The Post’s description, however, is both misleading and incomplete.

In fact, Netanyahu was a “32-year-old frustrated sales executive at an Israeli furniture company,” according to an Arens obituary penned by Bibi biographer (and frequent critic) Anshel Pfeffer. There is, of course, a significant difference between the jobs of a “salesman” and “executive” — not only in duties, but, if implicitly, in prestige as well.

Moreover, by the time that Netanyahu was chosen by Arens, Bibi was already a combat veteran of the elite IDF unit Sayeret Matkal, which is roughly analogous to the US Army’s Delta Force. Netanyahu was a decorated officer, having been shot in one operation. The future prime minister also possessed dual degrees from an elite school, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and had founded the Yonatan Netanyahu Anti-Terror Institute, named after his brother, a Sayeret Matkal officer who had been killed in an iconic hostage rescue mission in Uganda. That’s quite a resume — and one that the description of “furniture salesman” hardly hints at.

The Post’s gratuitous jab at Netanyahu was, of course, meant to demean the Israeli prime minister. At first glance, a single line in a larger article might not mean much. But the decision to belittle Bibi in another man’s obituary is quite revealing. It showcases how deeply ingrained The Washington Post’s anti-Netanyahu bias is. The paper simply can’t resist an opportunity to take a punch at him.

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

Tzipi and the ‘anybody but Bibi’ camp’s bluster - by Ruthie Blum

When Tzipi Livni and her ilk try to promote the idea that Netanyahu is a greater danger to Israel than Islamist missiles and butcher knives covered in Jewish blood, most of us just sigh and yawn.

Ruthie Blum..
JNS.org..
10 January '19..

In a typical tirade against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin (“Bibi”) Netanyahu on Tuesday, Hatnua Party chair Tzipi Livni said, “No leader in Israel has the right to destroy everything we have built here for his own personal needs.”

Referring to Netanyahu’s televised address to the nation on Monday evening, Livni—still stinging from her sudden ouster by Labor Party leader Avi Gabbay as head of the Zionist Union opposition bloc—added, “That’s what he does on prime time.”

Livni was not alone in lambasting Netanyahu for causing the country to spend three hours speculating about the “dramatic announcement” he was going to deliver, and then treating viewers to a complaint that he is not being given a fair shake by the legal system.

It was a disappointing display. Rumors had been rampant of imminent war, the possible release of Israelis in Hamas captivity or potential U.S. recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. The letdown, then, was enormous.

More importantly, it provided “anybody but Bibi” politicians and members of the media with the perfect opportunity to accuse Netanyahu of hijacking the airways to make a case for his innocence in a number of corruption cases for which he is being investigated. Channel 10 went as far as to cut off the prime minister’s remarks in the middle and resume its regular news broadcast.

Livni’s replacement as opposition leader, Shelly Yachimovich, called Netanyahu’s performance a “cynical and lame election show,” put on by someone who “created a fake drama out of nothing and took over screen time like a dictator.”

Such denunciations are par for the course within the “anyone but Bibi” camp, particularly ahead of a national election that Netanyahu is almost certain to win.

But Livni outdid even herself this week,

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

A lion by day, a fox by night - by Fiamma Nirenstein

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s innate drive is identity and security; he has chosen to avert the existential threat posed by Iran and to create a secure situation with the Palestinians without falling prey to any illusions.

Fiamma Nirenstein..
JNS.org..
01 January '18..

The date is not far off: Israel will hold early elections on April 9, 2019. Many people—naturally speaking about a prime minister like Benjamin Netanyahu, who has served three times since 1996 (again in 2009 and from 2013) and 16 times at the head of various ministerial posts—describe the upcoming elections as the grand spectacle that will mark the great leader’s end of power. The opposition has drummed up accusations and criminalization; this is going to be all part of the 100-day campaign we are going to see. Actually, this seems to be one of its many mistakes. It’s an overblown continuous chat that people are unable to listen to anymore.

So, what will really happen in Jerusalem after the next election?

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

‘Case 4775’: The public trial of Netanyahu - Welcome to the 2019 Israeli elections - by Alex Traiman

On the date of the upcoming elections, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will have served 4,775 days in office over his multiple terms, just behind founding Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion’s 4,877 days at the helm. “Case 4775” will be a public referendum on Netanyahu’s performance in one of the world's most difficult jobs.

Alex Traiman..
JNS.org..
26 December '18..

Israel’s embattled Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will seek to win a record-tying fifth election on April 9, which would put him in position to become the longest-serving premier in Israeli history—longer even than founding Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion.

On the date of the upcoming elections, Netanyahu will have served 4,775 days in office over his multiple terms, just behind Ben-Gurion’s 4,877 days at the helm. ‘Case 4775’ [days] will be a public referendum on Netanyahu’s performance in one of the world’s most difficult jobs.

Netanyahu’s current government, which will have served for more than four years by election day, collapsed this week over Israel’s agreeing to a ceasefire with Hamas following recent violence in Gaza, the government’s inability to pass legislation to increase the number of religious soldiers serving in the military and investigations into Netanyahu’s conduct as a public servant.

The State Prosecutor and Israeli Police have recently recommended that the Netanyahu be indicted for corruption in three separate cases, named Case 1000, 2000 and 4000. The Attorney General will decide in the coming weeks or months, possibly before elections, on whether to formally issue indictments.

Those who have opposed Netanyahu have sought his removal for years by hook or by crook. As the hook has failed at the polls time and again, Netanyahu’s opponents are working tirelessly to prove that the second-longest-serving Israeli prime minister is a crook.

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

Believe it or not, Hezbollah’s war on Israel does takes precedence over the war on Bibi. Sorry. - by Jonathan S. Tobin

Accusations that Netanyahu is “wagging the dog” by highlighting Hezbollah’s terror tunnels undermines his critics’ credibility.

Jonathan S. Tobin..
JNS.org..
06 December '18..

Maybe you thought that the discovery of tunnels built by Hezbollah under the border between Lebanon and Israel would generate a full-scale debate about the deadly nature of the threat from the terror group and its Iranian masters. But if so, you haven’t been paying much attention to the political atmosphere in Israel or the way the Jewish state and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu are covered in the international press.

The first mention of the tunnels in The New York Times came in an article with the headline “Suspected of Crimes, Netanyahu Is Also Suspected of Fear-Mongering.” The upshot of the piece was to frame the issue as merely a distraction from the prime minister’s legal troubles after the Israeli police recommended that he and his wife, Sara, be indicted on corruption charges.

The charges against Netanyahu are serious. Or rather, it might be said that this latest problem is more serious than two previous cases where the police also recommended his indictment. Netanyahu is accused of aiding a wealthy crony’s acquisition of the Bezeq Company. Bezeq owned a popular website Walla News that, in return for the prime minister’s ability to use the government’s regulatory power in its favor, provided positive coverage for him and his government. It remains to be seen whether Israel’s attorney general will accept the police recommendation that an actual crime was committed and a conviction can be obtained. The same is true about two more frivolous charges in which the police also sought indictments.

The debate about these accusations has played into the discussion about whether the government will wait to hold a new election next fall, when Netanyahu’s government’s term expires, or if he will move for an early election. The presumption is that if he were to be indicted—something that is by no means certain in any of the three cases—he would wish to enter into legal combat forearmed with the endorsement of the voters. That is because, to the horror of his opponents, every poll predicts Netanyahu’s coalition will be easily re-elected.

Israeli politics is just as nasty, personal and partisan as it is in the United States. So it was hardly surprising that cynics in the Israeli opposition and media, as well as their foreign counterparts, would interpret the furor over the tunnels as an attempt to change the subject from accusations of corruption.

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

The one option Israel doesn’t have in Gaza - by Evelyn Gordon

...Barring a miracle, Hamas will eventually become overconfident and cause Israel enough anguish to provoke it to reoccupy Gaza. By postponing that day, and thereby allowing Hamas to further arm and entrench itself, Israel merely ensures that when it comes, it will come at a much higher price—in Israeli casualties, in Palestinian casualties and in international opprobrium. But knowing that doesn’t change the political reality that such an operation isn’t possible now. In today’s reality, the most that Netanyahu can do is buy a few more years of quiet. And his only choice is whether to do so via a ceasefire or a limited military operation, each of which carries its own major price tag.

Evelyn Gordon..
Analysis from Israel..
22 November '18..
Link: http://evelyncgordon.com/the-one-option-israel-doesnt-have-in-gaza/

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is being assailed by his own base for his restraint last week following Hamas’s massive bombardment of southern Israel. But in considering what Israel’s policy should be, it’s important to realize that for now, the option of permanently ending Hamas terror doesn’t exist—not because it’s beyond Israel’s capability, but because it lacks sufficient public support.

If someone came up with an idea for destroying Hamas that could be executed quickly and with minimal casualties, Israelis obviously would support that, but nobody has. Thus the only plan with proven capability to suppress terror over the long term remains the one Israel executed in the West Bank in 2002 in response to the second intifada: The army goes in, and it never leaves. That’s how Israel defeated the second intifada, and how it has kept West Bank terror within tolerable limits ever since.

But doing the same in Gaza would have very high costs—in soldiers’ lives, in international opprobrium and possibly in saddling Israel with responsibility for Gaza’s civilian problems. It would be far more costly than it was to reoccupy the West Bank because Hamas has used its 11 years of total control over Gaza to become far better armed and far more deeply entrenched than West Bank terrorists were in 2002.

No democracy could undertake such a costly plan without widespread public support, but especially not Israel, because any major military operation requires a massive call-up of reservists, and Israeli reservists tend to vote with their feet. They’ll show up in droves for an operation with broad support, but an operation widely considered unjustified will spark major protests.

That’s exactly what happened when, during the second intifada, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon thought Israelis’ overwhelming support for reoccupying the West Bank created a golden opportunity to do the same in Gaza. He was forced to scrap that idea after a massive public outcry, especially from reservists.

The crucial difference Sharon had overlooked was the level of pain that Israelis were experiencing. The West Bank was wreaking havoc nationwide at that time. A wave of suicide bombings and other attacks in cities throughout Israel killed 452 Israelis in 2002, including 130 in March 2002 alone. But Gaza was causing most Israelis very little pain. Though there were attacks on soldiers and settlers in Gaza itself, there were almost no attacks from Gaza inside Israel. Consequently, most Israelis weren’t willing to pay the price that a major operation in Gaza would have entailed.

Until Israelis are given a credible alternative, Netanyahu will remain Israel’s indispensable man - by Jonathan S. Tobin

...To put Netanyahu’s current position in perspective, it’s necessary to think back to when it looked as if he was done for good. After a meteoric rise to the top and beating out Shimon Peres in 1996, Netanyahu’s first term as prime minister was less than a ringing success.

Jonathan S. Tobin..
JNS.org..
21 November '18..

He did it again. Despite being placed in an impossible position by the resignation of Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman over accepting another ceasefire with Hamas, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu managed to keep his coalition government alive.

Netanyahu called the bluff of Minister of Education Naftali Bennett, who threatened to topple the government if he wasn’t named defense minister after Lieberman’s parting. That meant that when the dust cleared, one right-wing rival was sidelined, and the other exposed as unwilling or unable to take on the prime minister and set off a crisis that would force early elections.

It was yet another successful maneuver by the man who has presided over Israel since 2009, and is very likely to be put in a position to lead it for at least another four years when the country goes to the polls to elect a new Knesset either in the spring or later in 2019.

The graveyards are full of people who thought they were indispensable, and Netanyahu’s run of victories can’t last forever. But the prime minister’s frenemies within his coalition, as well as his open foes in the opposition, know that he currently stands alone when Israeli voters consider who should lead them.

This would be an extraordinary achievement for anyone, but when you consider the political hurdles that Netanyahu has overcome, it’s downright remarkable. Nevertheless, a sober analysis of the situation reveals that his triumphs say more about the lack of other options than it does about his personal greatness. For all of his deft management of the government, the failure of his opponents on both the left and the right to come up with rational alternatives has kept him as the only person most observers think has a chance of leading the next Israeli government.

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

Why Bibi won’t be beat in America - by Jonathan S. Tobin

...Pfeffer is right that many American Jews disagree with Netanyahu’s policies. But the notion that they are, as he writes, Netanyahu’s “enablers” and bear the responsibility for his flouting of progressive sensibilities is not so much wrongheaded as it is pathetic commentary on the bankruptcy of the Israeli left.

Jonathan S. Tobin..
JNS.org..
04 May '18..

Israeli left-wingers have never gotten used to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. While they would have detested any Likud Party leader, Netanyahu’s combination of intellectual heft and glib political hucksterism has always driven his opponents crazy. At one and the same time, they view him as both a fraud and something of a political genius. Most of all, they bitterly resent his skill in maneuvering among both American Jews and Washington politicos.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the 2018 AIPAC policy conference. Credit: AIPAC.
Though he’s been a major figure in the Israel-Diaspora relations for decades—dating back to his service as a diplomat in Washington and then the United Nations in the 1980s—many Israelis still can’t figure out why a man who often treats American Jews with such disrespect and has so little interest in them as a community still seems to command the respect of Americans. Though many Americans oppose Netanyahu, the fact that he is not widely reviled in the United States is a source of constant frustration to his domestic critics.

Haaretz writer Anshel Pfeffer’s new biography, Bibi: The Turbulent Life and Times of Benjamin Netanyahu, is the latest entry in the list of left-wing attempts to unravel the mystery of Netanyahu’s success and his hold on the affections of so many American Jews. The book has its share of interesting gossip about the prime minister and his family, and Pfeffer’s attempt to get inside Netanyahu’s head to figure out his complicated relationship with America provides some points of interest even for those who have more sympathy for the prime minister than the author.

(Continue to Full Column)

Updates throughout the day at http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com. 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.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Also check-out This Ongoing War by Frimet and Arnold Roth. An excellent blog, very important work. 

.

Truth Be Told, Leaders Are Not Obliged to Obey Their Advisors - by Maj. Gen. (res.) Gershon Hacohen

The multidimensional complexity with which national leaders must contend is a necessary condition for effective strategic decision-making. On many occasions, it requires that those leaders ignore, or even act in contravention of, the advice of the professional echelon.

Maj. Gen. (res.) Gershon Hacohen..
BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 767..
14 March '18..
Link: https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/leaders-advisors/

Perhaps the oddest of the many leaks about the looming charges against Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu is the reported accusation by former-confidant-turned-state’s-witness Nir Hefetz that the prime minister recently ignored the professional echelon’s recommendations when making an important security decision.

Netanyahu’s personal conduct notwithstanding, the leak raises two important questions about the nature of strategic decision-making. One concerns the role of national leaders and the extent to which they are obligated to follow their advisers’ recommendations. The second relates to the extent to which close, or even intimate, advisers are fully apprised of their leaders’ inner thoughts, motives, and considerations as they grapple with hard decisions.

In essence, the two questions are interrelated. If one expects national leaders to make important decisions in a manner befitting heads of expert committees, then the deliberations, as a matter of professional procedure, must be transparent and must openly address all considerations. This in turn means that whoever has taken part in such deliberations does indeed know, and can testify about, what took place during them. In real life, however, no high level decision-making process – let alone one at the national level – can be conducted entirely out in the open.

When decision-making defies experts’ recommendations

So long as decisions do not involve situations that are without precedent, we can put our fate in the hands of skilled managers. A country’s railroad system, for example, can be overseen by professional experts. But not everything in the life of society and the state runs along neat railroad tracks. Leadership as a unique trait is required precisely when there are no familiar causeways and no continuity between what has occurred before and what is occurring now.

In an emergency situation, which, by its very nature, falls outside any prior framework, the authority of experts meets its limit. It was just such a situation that Winston Churchill, as dramatically portrayed in the recent movie The Darkest Hour, had to confront. In the face of the German Blitzkrieg, the British generals – with all their professionalism – turned out to be helpless. At the fateful hour in Dunkirk it was Churchill’s leadership that enabled the heroic rescue of the hundreds of thousands of soldiers who were trapped on the beach.

The leadership of David Ben-Gurion manifested a similar understanding, throughout his political career, of the limitations of expert knowledge. An especially well known case is his insistence, during the War of Independence, on concentrating the main war effort on Jerusalem against the view of the General Staff. The deliberations of the “committee of five” that he headed were notable for Ben-Gurion’s courageous openness to criticism. Amidst heated controversy in the wake of the Battle of Latrun, Gen. Yigal Yadin, head of the Operations Directorate, had harsh words for Ben-Gurion’s role:

The only brigade that was available for the battle was the 7th Brigade…Here Ben-Gurion carried out his most blatant intervention, which in my opinion ran counter to all his powers as someone who saw himself as authorized to give orders to the army. All the soldiers were new recruits and needed another seven or eight days before they could be sent into battle; to do otherwise was suicide…I tried to explain that it was impossible from a technical standpoint, but all my words were in vain. Ben-Gurion demanded that I summon the brigade commander, as he wanted to hear what he had to say… I am sharply critical of the brigade commander for carrying out the order… In light of all the military considerations, such an operation could not be permitted, and it ended in a terrible catastrophe.

Ben-Gurion responded without mincing words: “In my opinion [it ended] in a big victory, though not a cheap one.”

The Battle of Latrun was indeed a complete failure from a tactical standpoint, and yet it was an important victory at the systemic level. And while one can ponder the wisdom of the decision in hindsight, there is no doubt that it was not only completely legitimate but also an exemplary case of a national leader’s resolute decision-making of a kind that is indispensable when defying the prescriptions of experts.