Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, together with Quartet Representative Tony Blair, announced Friday a series of steps that Israel will take to enhance stability and advance economic prosperity with the Palestinian Authority, ultimately contributing to peace and security in the region. The broad framework of Israel’s plan includes:

1. Steps to advance the economic growth in the Palestinian areas
2. Steps to make Gaza independent of Israeli infrastructure
3. Steps to diversify gas supplies and develop additional energy sources in the future

The concrete measures Israel plans to take include:

• An extension of Palestinian Authority security presence in Area B on the West Bank – with seven towns approved in principle.
• An agreement to fast-track the construction or reconstruction of schools and health clinics in Area C  on the basis of plans submitted by the Palestinian Authority and the Quartet Office.
• Granting West Bank identification cards to 5,000 Gaza-registered residents of the West Bank.
• An agreement to quickly resolve outstanding revenue collection issues between the Government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority Finance Ministries.
• An agreement to revive discussions on the “Gaza Marine” gas field project, with approval in principle to supply Palestinian offshore gas to Gaza power plants and the approval of a new power station in Gaza.
• An agreement to establish mobile desalination plants to meet Gaza’s needs for clean water, and the approval in principle for a permanent desalination plant.
• Approval for all the sanitation and water treatment plants necessary for Gaza.  The Government of Israel agreed to facilitate and support the entry of construction materials to enable projects to be completed on schedule.
• An agreement on further measures to promote Gaza exports, especially in furniture, textiles, and agriculture. In February, the Israeli Government will transfer 40,000 tons of aggregates into Gaza.
• Future approval of another 20 named construction projects. The aim is to begin a pilot project for private sector construction materials by April 1, 2011.
• Israel has agreed to encourage the implementation of all projects that abide by municipal regulations that will improve infrastructure in East Jerusalem for Palestinians, particularly in housing, with two projects already approved.

Full text of the joint press conference is available on the Prime Minister’s website.

2 people like this post.

Unlike

In today’s USA Today, Israel’s Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren looks at what the future holds for the Israeli and Palestinian people if both sides get back on track.

“Israelis and Palestinians must touch the most sensitive aspects of our national narratives and our most cherished beliefs. President Obama and Secretary Clinton will continue to play a dynamic role in assisting us to overcome obstacles. Arab states should also support the process and normalize relations with Israel. But there is no substitute for direct talks between Israelis and Palestinians. Though we have long been rivals in a conflict, we can now be partners for peace.”

To read the full Op-Ed from USA Today, click here.

2 people like this post.

Unlike

Unfortunately, the Palestinian position during these 17 years has not moved one inch from its maximalist demands. Isn’t it time that the Palestinians are asked directly and openly if they are prepared to make any concessions? Are they prepared to recognize Israel as a Jewish state and the Jewish connection to the Western Wall and Temple Mount? Are they prepared to recognize that there are Jewish refugees in Arab states, and that Israel has very real security concerns?

While the world has unfortunately focused on settlement building, it has gone largely unnoticed that Palestinian leaders are retreating from previously accepted positions, especially the need for a two-states-for-two-peoples solution.

Click here to read the full Op-Ed in today’s Los Angeles Times.

Like

Unlike

For Chanukah 5771, we could use the Maccabees with us once again. The story of Chanukah can be many things – the “Festival of Lights,” a day to celebrate miracles – but it is most importantly about the Jewish people solidifying their claim to the land of Israel in the face of revisionism. If it were not for the Maccabees, the Second Temple would be mentioned in our children’s books as “an ancient Greek temple.” Yes, just over 2100 years ago the Second Temple was filled not with Jews but with statues of Zeus and other Greek gods. This was only temporary of course, the real character of the Second Temple being restored when the Jews threw out the statues and rededicated the Temple in 165 B.C.E.

Today, in the face of Arab claims that the Western Wall is “Palestinian,” it is time for a second “dedication,” or “Chanukah”. While Judah Maccabee had to take up arms to protect the Jewish people, Israel’s battle for survival today is also fought on paper. The Palestinians wield an eraser, but one cannot simply erase what has been written in the ink of history. The Palestinians erroneously believe that the current peace process is with a Jewish People that only appeared on the scene in 1948, a fallacy that is as dangerous as it is ignorant.

In 161 B.C.E. Rome, one of the greatest powers in world history, did what the Palestinians can’t seem to wrap their heads around: they accepted the Jewish people. As history tells us, the Roman-Jewish Treaty was an agreement signed by Judah Maccabee and the Roman Republic, which states: “May all go well with the Romans and with the nation of the Jews at sea and on land forever, and may sword and enemy be far from them.”

The Palestinian narrative is solely based on the Jewish People as “outsiders,” an invading force that has no business being in what they see as their land. Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that this is an unfair and historically absurd claim, yet it is a claim that is taking hold and growing stronger every day.

Before the “peace process” began, Arab policy towards Israel was defined by what became known following the Khartoum Resolution as the “Three No’s:” “No peace with Israel,” “No negotiations with Israel,” and “No recognition of the Jewish State of Israel.” That was after the Six-Day War, over 40 years ago. To say that much has happened since then would be a gross understatement. The game changer came in 1979, when Egypt and Israel signed a monumental peace agreement. After living under (and fighting for) a policy of rejection, it took over a decade for one single Arab country to courageously buck the trend and say “yes” to peace.

During the Fatah Revolutionary Council’s fifth meeting in Ramallah this past weekend, the council decided on a not-so-original set of “no’s.” “No” to Israel as a Jewish State, and “no” to the so-called “land swaps.” Perhaps the Arab world wants to turn the clock back to the idyllic “Summer of ‘67”, but the world cannot stand idly by as a conscious effort is made to reverse decades of progress – progress that has benefited Israelis, Palestinians, and Arabs alike throughout the region.

The core problem behind the “no’s” of 1968 and the “no’s” of today is the same: Palestinian revisionism. With their attempts not only to block the peace process but to erase Jewish claims to the land, they exhibit a wish to send Jewish people back to 1947, a place in history not too dissimilar from the time of Judah Maccabee. If the Palestinians assert their claim to Israel based on centuries of Ottoman rule, perhaps the Jewish people should give them a history lesson on the Greco-Syrian Seleucid Empire in Judea. Because, after all, our ancestors were there then, celebrating the very first Chanukah.

Joel Lion is Consul for Media and Spokesperson at the Consulate General of Israel in New York

7 people like this post.

Unlike

Israel’s Security Cabinet decided today, Wednesday November 19th, to accept, in principle, the proposal of the UN and the UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Force In Lebanon) Commander, to completely withdraw IDF personnel from the northern section of the town of Ghajar.

Ghajar, whose community consists mostly of Syrian Alawites with dual Israeli-Syrian citizenships, is a town which happens to fall right on the border between Israel and Lebanon, the so-called “Blue-Line.” The Blue-Line is a border demarcation established to determine Israel’s withdrawal from Southern Lebanon in 2000 as mandated by UN Security Council Resolution 425. Ghajar is united, and does not have a physical barrier or fence marking the Blue Line i.e. where Lebanon ends and Israel begins.

As northern Ghajar is the last area that the IDF has personnel stationed, Israel’s decision to remove troops from that section of the town will be an important step towards supporting a permanent ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon.

According to UN Resolution 1701, passed after the 2006 war against Hezbollah forces operating on the Lebanese border, Lebanon is required to, among other things, respect the Blue Line and prevent the passage of weapons into the hands of Hezbollah terrorists.

The Security Cabinet authorized the Foreign Ministry to complete the details of the temporary arrangement in coordination with the UN and UNIFIL Commander General Alberto Asarta as soon as possible.  Both the security of Israel’s citizens and the normal life of the residents of Ghajar, which remains undivided, will continue to be maintained while the new arrangements are being put in place. The final agreement will be brought to the Security Cabinet for approval before it is implemented.

U.S. State Department Spokesperson P.J. Crowley “welcomes the announcement today by Israel’s Security Cabinet that it accepts in principle the proposal offered by the UNIFIL Force Commander, providing for the complete withdrawal of Israeli military forces from Lebanese territory in and around the village of Ghajar.”

He went on to say in a prepared statement that “the United States encourages Israel and the UN to complete the technical details necessary to implement this proposal rapidly and thereby protect the rights of the affected civilians and further the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 (2006), which aims for a permanent ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon.”

1 person likes this post.

Unlike

The following is a joint statement of the Office of the Prime Minister of Israel and the Office of the Secretary of State of the United States following their November 11th meeting:

Prime Minister Netanyahu and Secretary Clinton had a good discussion today, with a friendly and productive exchange of views on both sides. Secretary Clinton reiterated the United States’ unshakable commitment to Israel’s security and to peace in the region.

‪‪The Prime Minister and the Secretary agreed on the importance of continuing direct negotiations to achieve our goals. The Secretary reiterated that “the United States believes that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state, based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements.” Those requirements will be fully taken into account in any future peace agreement.

‪‪‪The discussions between the Prime Minister and the Secretary focused on creating the conditions for the resumption of direct negotiations aimed at producing a two-state solution. Their teams will work closely together in the coming days toward that end.

Like

Unlike

The story of the Jewish people is that of great destruction followed by miraculous redemption.

That same resilient spirit is exemplified by your collective efforts to help this great city rebuild itself after Hurricane Katrina.

Just as you have rallied time after time to help Israel weather the storms it has faced, you rallied to help New Orleans to get back on its feet.

You should be proud of what you have been doing for the Jewish people and the Jewish state, and for others. I am doubly proud to be with you here today. Thank you. continue reading…

1 person likes this post.

Unlike

WASHINGTON, DC — As many countries lowered taxes during the economic crisis, Israel raised taxes, said Israeli Minister of Finance Yuval Steinitz during a speech  to students and professors at John Hopkins University’s Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS). Traveling to Washington, DC for the Annual Meetings of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank Group, Minister Steinitz offered the audience a look into “Israel’s Unique Approach to the Global Economic Crisis.”

Photo: Kaveh Sardari, www.sardari.com

“[Other countries] sacrificed the future for the present and created large deficits. We decided that the long term is more important. According to economic philosophy, if you sacrifice the future, you in essence damage the present. Economics is mainly expectations for the future. Therefore, while the rest of the world lowered taxes, we raised indirect taxes. Now, as the rest of the world is raising taxes, we are in the midst of sharply lowering taxes for companies and individuals by 2016,” said Minister Steinitz.

He also pointed to the government’s use of a two-year or bi-annual budget, a system which Minister Steinitz points to as an important element to focus on the implementation, not the planning of the budget. “All governments are spending at least six months on planning and preparing the budgets, then they are spending six months focusing on implementing. Then they begin focusing on next year’s budget again. It is totally illogical,” Steinitz said. Earlier this year, the IMF even recommended the idea of a bi-annual budget, he said.

What Israel’s finance sector has done over the past few years has also received worldwide attention. Just today, Stanley Fischer, Governor of the Bank of Israel was awarded the prestigious title of “Best Bank Governor of the World” by industry-leading Euromoney.

“Israel’s resilience during its financial crisis and its aftermath prove that Stanley Fischer is worthy of the respect he commands at the top of the financial community,” according to the magazine. “His bold moves to raise interest rates in September 2009 – the first country to do so after the crisis, proved well guided and prescient. Further rises have also been well timed, allowing the economy to grow at a healthy rate of 4.7% in the second quarter of 2010 while keeping inflation in check around 1.8%. His innovative move towards an interventionist exchange rate policy, while controversial at the time, has bolstered Israel’s reserves while boosting the country’s exports, which are key to its economic performance. Despite Israel’s political and regional difficulties, Fischer’s policies contributed to Israel’s acceptance to the OECD in May this year.”

Here the full audio of Israeli Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz’s lecture at SAIS: http://www.sais-jhu.edu/news-and-events/index.htm

4 people like this post.

Unlike

Haven’t we seen this before?

This past Sunday, one of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’ top aides said, “The resumption of [peace] talks requires tangible steps, the first of them a freeze on settlements.”

It’s hard not to be overcome with a sense of déjà vu. Ten months ago, Israel ordered a 10-month freeze on settlement building, with the hopes of resuming peace talks. So what happened? Peace talks did resume, just last month. That was all well and good, until the Palestinians decided to play games. continue reading…

6 people like this post.

Unlike

Speech at the UN General Assembly
September 28 2010
Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Avigdor Lieberman

Mr. President, distinguished colleagues, ladies and gentlemen: when I arrived yesterday in New York, I received a telephone call from a member of one of the  Jewish organizations who asked me how I am coping with all the pressure which is being placed on Israel; surely, he said, it must be very difficult. I recalled an old joke which speaks of five Jews who changed the way we see the world: Moses, law is everything; Jesus, love is everything; Marx, money is everything; Freud, sex is everything; Einstein, everything is relative.

So I told him that everything is relative. On one hand, it’s really difficult. On the other hand, it is easier than before, because now we have a stable coalition, stable government and we have the support of a majority of Israel’s citizens.

We are ready for a fair solution and we are ready to cooperate with the international community. However, we are not ready to compromise our national security or the vital interests of the State of Israel.

At the outset, I want to emphasize that contrary to what is often shown in the international media, the political arena in Israel is not divided between those who seek peace and those who seek war. Everyone wants peace and the controversy in Israel centers on the specific question of how to achieve this peace; how to reach security and stability in the region.

And the question is: why, during the seventeen years since we signed the Oslo Accords, have we not arrived at a comprehensive agreement signifying the end of the conflict and the removal of future mutual claims?

Despite all of the efforts of all the good people with the best of intentions, including Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert, despite the summit meetings at Camp David between Ehud Barak and Yasser Arafat with the presence of former President Bill Clinton, and despite the Annapolis Summit between Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas, we are today still in deadlock.

In fact, contrary to the prevalent view that the Israeli‐Palestinian conflict is the heart of the instability in the Middle East or is the main reason for the region’s numerous conflicts, the reality is entirely different. More than ninety percent of the wars and war victims of the Middle East since the Second World War did not result from the Israeli Palestinian conflict and are in no way connected to Israel, stemming rather, from conflicts involving Muslims or conflicts between Arab States. The Iran‐Iraq war, the Gulf war, the wars between North and South Yemen, the Hamma atrocities in Syria, and the wars in Algeria and Lebanon, are just a few examples of a list that goes on and on.

The second flawed explanation for the longstanding conflict between Israel and the Palestinians which has gained popularity is hat the root of the problem is the so‐called “occupation”, the settlements in Judea and Samaria and the settlers themselves. Only the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, so the argument goes, will ensure peace in the region.

It is sufficient to state a number of well‐known facts in order to refute this claim: firstly, all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza were under Arab control for 19 years, between 1948 and 1967. During these 19 years, no‐one tried to create a Palestinian state.

Peace agreements were achieved with Egypt and Jordan despite the presence of settlements. And the opposite is also true: we evacuated twenty‐one flourishing settlements in Gush Katif, and we transferred more than 10,000 Jews and in return, we have Hamas in power and thousands of missiles on Sderot and southern Israel.

The other misguided argument is the claim that the Palestinian issue prevents a determined international front against Iran. This argument is not only flawed, it is completely irresponsible: the same argument could be made that the Palestinian issue prevents action on North Korea, piracy in Somalia, the humanitarian crisis in Sudan or the challenge of Afghanistan.

Just as the Khomeini Revolution had nothing to do with the Palestinian issue, so too is the Iranian decision to develop nuclear weapons unrelated.

In truth, the connection between Iran and the Israeli‐Palestinian conflict is precisely reversed. Iran can exist without Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah, but the terrorist organizations cannot exist without Iran. Relying on these proxies, Iran can at any given time foil any agreement between Israel and the Palestinians or with Lebanon. Thus, in searching for a durable agreement with the Palestinians, one which will deal with the true roots of the conflict and which will endure for many years, one must understand that first, the Iranian issue must be resolved.

One must deal first with the root of the problem and not its symptoms. There are of course other problems as well which must be solved and this is not a sufficient condition. But it is nevertheless a necessary one.

In trying to resolve the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, we are dealing with two types of problems: emotional problems and practical problems. This is why the solution must also be a two‐staged one.

The emotional problems are first and foremost the utter lack of confidence between the sides and issues such as Jerusalem, recognition of Israel as the nation‐state of the Jewish People and refugees.

Under these conditions, we should focus on coming up with a long‐term intermediate agreement, something that could take a few decades. We need to raise an entire new generation that will have mutual trust and will not be influenced by incitement and extremist messages.

To achieve a final status agreement, we must understand that the primary practical obstacle is the friction between the two nations.

As is true everywhere, where there are two nations, two religions and two languages with competing claims to the same land, there is friction and conflict. Countless examples of ethnic conflict around the world confirm this, whether in the Balkans, the Caucuses, Africa, the Far East or the Middle East.

Where effective separation has been achieved, conflict has either been avoided, or has been dramatically reduced or resolved. Consider the cases of the former Yugoslav republics, the split‐up of Czechoslovakia and the independence of East Timor, as cases in point.

Thus, the guiding principle for a final status agreement must not be land‐for‐peace but rather, exchange of populated territory. Let me be very clear: I am not speaking about moving populations, but rather about moving borders to better reflect demographic realities.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is not an extraordinary insight, and is far less controversial than some may seek to claim. In fact, precisely this notion – that a mismatch between borders and nationalities is a recipe for conflict – has long been accepted as a virtual truism in the academic community.

Leading scholars and highly respected research institutions have even coined the term “Right‐Sizing the State” to capture the idea that states and nations must be in balance in order to ensure peace. This is not a controversial political policy. It is an empirical truth.

But beyond empirical truth, there is historical truth:   almost 4000 years during which the Jewish People were born in the Land of Israel, while developing the corpus of ethical and intellectual treasures that have been instrumental in giving rise to Western Civilization. 2000 years of forced exile, and interim conquest by Byzantines, Arabs, Mamelukes, Ottomans and others, cannot, and never will, impair the unbreakable bonds of the Jewish People to its homeland. Israel is not only where we are. It is who we are.

In closing, let me remind everyone in this hall about the quote that adorns the United Nations plaza outside, spoken in Jerusalem almost 3000 years ago by the Jewish prophet Isaiah:

וְכִתְּתוּ חַרְבוֹתָם לְאִתִּים, וַחֲנִיתוֹתֵיהֶם לְמַזְמֵרוֹת–לֹא-יִשָּׂא גוֹי אֶל-גּוֹי
חֶרֶב, וְלֹא-יִלְמְדוּ עוֹד מִלְחָמָה
“They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning‐hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. “

Inspired by the deep wisdom embodied in these words, let us hope that the path to true peace prophesied by Isaiah, will guide our two peoples, in two nation‐states, living in peace and security.

Thank You.

8 people like this post.

Unlike