Posts Tagged Likkud
African Migrants in Israel – Betar Australia open letter to Danny Danon
Posted by MK in Jewish Identity, Middle East, Politics on June 12, 2012
Regular readers will have seen the rather concerning rhetoric coming out of, inter alia, Likkud MK Danny Danon regarding the African migrants in Israel. Regular readers will also know my feelings towards Mr Danon — particularly that he misrepresents his ideological forebears and is in many ways betraying the Revisionist Zionist tradition.
I have just seen this open letter to Danon from the Australian branch of Betar — the youth movement of Likkud’s father, Ze’ev Jabotinsky, of which Danon is world chair. As it is an open letter, I will reproduce it in full and hope it gets as much exposure as it deserves.
While the letter, I think, speaks for itself, I do want to extend a huge kol ha’kavod to Betar Australia for standing up for the values on which their movement is based.
An open letter to MK Danny Danon,
We are writing to you in respect of your position as the chairman of the Knesset committee for Aliyah, Absorption and Diaspora Affairs, the chairman of World Likud and as a past chairman of World Betar. Recently we have seen a number of attacks on African migrants living in Israel. Regardless of their status in the country, these attacks have come as a shock and an embarrassment to us as Jews. However, your words in regard to the “national plague” (that is commonly referred to as African migrants) have greatly upset us as Betarim.
We would like to reiterate that Betar Australia firmly subscribes to Betar’s key stance of ‘Had-Ness’ – our most important value is Zionism, we subscribe to the importance of the Jewish majority and our highest flag is the Israeli flag. We do acknowledge the complexities related to the influx of African migrants, and we are not trying to mandate a policy to you from the other side of the world; however we believe that you need to urgently reassess your policy in regards of some of the important ideological principles held by Betar and Ze’ev Jabotinsky.
When Jabotinsky wrote “in the beginning, God created men” (The Story of My Days, 38); he was referring to mankind as a whole, to our shared origins and our shared humanity. This aspect of humanity is unequivocally expressed in our ideological principle of Hadar. Hadar, as you know does not specifically refer to the Jews – it refers to how all people should treat themselves and others in a ‘princely’ manner.
These people fleeing conflict from Africa, who have chosen Israel because they know it is a moral and free country, are just as human as us. In fact, in their present state, they are unmistakably similar to us as Jews. We have always been refugees; our ancestors have been refugees since the destruction of the first Temple up to our grandparents, who fled a climax of persecution around the world. Menachem Begin saw this when he allowed Vietnamese refugees who had been rejected by the rest of the world to settle in Israel, even granting them citizenship, as the minister, David Levy, the former Minister of Absorption said, “May they lend a hand to save women and children who are in the heart of the sea without a homeland, and lead them to safe shores.” Israel desperately needs to develop policy to deal with this crisis and to deal with it humanely. We reiterate that we are not seeking to dictate policy from outside of Israel. However, as Jews and Betarim we do expect for the political establishment in Israel to act decently and to approach this issue humanely, without prejudice and to acknowledge the responsibilities that Israel has towards refugees as a signatory to both the UN Refugee Convention (1951) and Protocol (1967).
Human rights have, apparently, been trademarked by the Left of politics, but as our ideology shows they have origins in the Right and as Begin’s story and the history of past Likud government’s show; it has almost always been the Right which has implemented the humanistic policies that have rendered Israel as ‘a light unto other nations.’ As Betarim, we urge you to reconsider your stance regarding these people and we request that you ensure that Israel fairly determines who needs protection and offers them this. To deport people to persecution and danger is not the act of a Jewish State. Jews have been persecuted for thousands of years and their state should not be one that has a hand in leading others to suffer the same fate. As Jabotinsky wrote, “there is no power that would be able to tear from one’s heart the hope for a better future.”
Ki Sheket Hu Refesh – Because Silence is Mud.
Tel Hai,
Betar Australia Inc.
HUGE news: Kadima/Likkud unity government
Posted by MK in Good News, Middle East, Politics on May 8, 2012
This is a VERY welcome development in Israeli politics. Bibi Netanyahu and Shaul Mofaz have agreed to form a unity government instead of going to early elections.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and opposition chairman MK Shaul Mofaz (Kadima) reached an agreement early Tuesday morning to form a national unity government and cancel early elections, which had been expected to take place on September 4.
Under the agreement, Kadima will join Netanyahu’s government and support its policies in exchange for a commitment that the government will support its proposal for an alternative to the Tal Law, which allows full-time yeshiva students to defer national service.
This was always a strong possibility with a Mofaz-led Kadima — remember that Kadima was formed when Sharon split from Likkud to withdraw from Gaza. Half of the Kadima MKs are Likkudniks and really it was only a matter of time before they joined Likkud in government.
Between them, the two parties have a near majority in their own right. Add Barak’s Atzmeut party and you have what a lot of us have been praying for: a strong, secular, centrist coalition (yep, “praying”).
Getting rid of all the crazies means that Bibi can allow the Tal Law to expire and stop this ridiculous Haredi exemption from contributing to Israeli society. It also means that he will no longer be beholden to Lieberman, which immediately curtails the encroaching Putin-esque antidemocratic reforms from Beitenu and gives space for the opening of markets that the country desperately needs in order to address its numerous economic woes.
Overall, this is the best thing that has happened in Israeli politics since at least 2009. Hopefully it will live up to its potential.
OMG! OMG! I totally can’t believe he said that!!!1!!!!1! #Obama
Posted by MK in Ideology, Middle East, Opinion, Politics on May 21, 2011
Well, Obama gave his long-awaited speech last night and I finally have a minute to write about it. He very movingly said that America supports democracy, without saying how; denounced Assad and Syria, without announcing how to take the regime down (aside from the sanctions the US just passed); similarly handled Iran and Bahrain and then spoke about Libya without changing the policy. Then he waxed lyrical about democracy for a while, then a little bit about Palestine, opposing unilateral statehood, all good…
But then, he dropped this bombshell:
Remarks by the President on the Middle East and North Africa | The White House
So while the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear: a viable Palestine, a secure Israel. The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their full potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state.
OH-MY-GOD!!! NO HE DID NOT JUST SAY THAT!!!
What’s that you say? Not a big deal? This has been the US policy for at least a decade? Well I’ll have you know that he did not re-affirm Bush’s commitment that the swaps he mentioned would cover the areas that they would most logically cover (i.e. the ones just over the border, where all the settlers are).
Nope, that crazy old dude in America who reckons the world will end tomorrow is pretty much right. We may as well abandon hope right now. I mean, just look at Bibi’s response:
Statement by PM Netanyahu on address by US President Obama 19-May-2011
Among other things, those commitments [that Obama should re-affirm] relate to Israel not having to withdraw to the 1967 lines which are both indefensible and whichwould leave major Israeli population centers in Judea and Samaria beyond those lines.
…Without a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem outside the borders of Israel, no territorial concession will bring peace
But that’s nothing, check what his fellow Likkudniks are saying (well, at least one Likkud media-whore).
Danon: Obama adopted Arafat’s plan for Israe… JPost – Headlines
Likud MK Danny Danon on Thursday said that “Barack Hussein Obama adopted the staged plan for Israel’s destruction of Yasser Arafat, and he is trying to force it on our prime minister,”
Meanwhile, the PA have called an emergency meeting, because apparently the weeks that Obama has been hyping this speech up as a radical re-definition of his Middle East policy wasn’t enough to make them think “hey, this might be important, maybe we should arrange a meeting around that time.”
Meanwhile, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas…will convene “emergency” talks with Palestinian and Arab officials to consider further steps.
Even Allan Dershowitz figured that it was a “serious mistake”:
President Obama’s mistake – JPost – Magazine – Features
President Barack Obama should be commended for his emphasis on Israel’s security and his concern about Hamas joining the Palestinian Authority without renouncing its violent charter. But he made one serious mistake that tilts the balance against Israel in any future negotiations. Without insisting that the Palestinians give up their absurd claim to have millions of supposed refugees “return” to Israel as a matter of right, he insisted that Israel must surrender all of the areas captured in its defensive war of 1967, subject only to land swaps.
In fact, according to some Republican Presidential hopefuls, it was just plain dangerous (link below):
Republican presidential hopeful Rick Santorum said… “This, at a time when the Palestinian Authority and Hamas just forged a new alliance. The current Administration needs to come to terms with its confused and dangerous foreign policy soon, as clarity and security are the necessary conditions of any serious and coherent American set of policies.”
And Tim Pawlenty, another GOP presidential candidate, called the proposal to return to 1967 lines a “mistaken and very dangerous demand.
But the cake was most definitely taken by potential presidential candidate Mitt Romney:
Mitt Romney accuses Obama of throwing Israel “under the bus” – Political Hotsheet – CBS News
“President Obama has thrown Israel under the bus,” Romney said. “He has disrespected Israel and undermined its ability to negotiate peace. He has also violated a first principle of American foreign policy, which is to stand firm by our friends.”
Hear that? Under a bus! Kind of like that bus that Hamas fired a rocket at recently.
But that’s still not the most bizarre thing that has happened around this whole speech. Want to know what’s really pointing us toward that apocalypse? Well, I figured that the world would end before these people agreed with each other:
Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said Thursday that U.S. President Barack Obama’s major Mideast policy speech was disappointing, telling Al Jazeera television that the U.S. president did not propose anything new.
I’m amazed at the amount of insta-commentary out there suggesting that the President has proposed something radical and new by declaring that Israel’s 1967 borders should define — with land-swaps — the borders of a Palestinian state. I’m feeling a certain Groundhog Day effect here. This has been the basic idea for at least 12 years.
Yup, you heard it here first. Jeffrey Goldberg is siding with Hamas over Netanyahu. I expect hellfire to start raining any second now.
So where do I sit? Somewhere around Dershowitz probably. Israel needs to face-up to the fact that it will have to give away the West Bank at some point in the near future. That said, Palestinians REALLY need to face-up to the fact that they are not all going to go back to wherever their grandparents lived in the early 1940′s. They should start pursuing Israel in court for compensation before their claims become impossible to prove and they need to start thinking about the state that they will build once Israel is out of the West Bank and they no longer have any excuses.
Otherwise, Goldberg (but not Hamas) did raise a very good point:
Here is what Hillary Clinton said in 2009: “We believe 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.”
So really, Obama was saying nothing new. The problem with that is that he needed to say something new, that was the whole point of “re-defining his Middle East policy”. He hasn’t re-defined anything, he’s only re-iterated it. He could have written this speech 2 years ago and you wouldn’t know any difference.
This is a shame, because his policy has been flawed from the beginning. As Dershowitz hinted at, he has been putting too much pressure on Israel, forcing Bibi into a corner, while being hesitant to confront the Palestinians on any of their numerous sticking points. The sad thing is that all the pieces seem to be there in front of him, but he just can’t put the picture together:
Now, ultimately, it is up to the Israelis and Palestinians to take action. No peace can be imposed upon them — not by the United States; not by anybody else. But endless delay won’t make the problem go away. What America and the international community can do is to state frankly what everyone knows — a lasting peace will involve two states for two peoples: Israel as a Jewish state and the homeland for the Jewish people, and the state of Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people, each state enjoying self-determination, mutual recognition, and peace.
Overall, some was good, some was bad, but little was in any way surprising. This outrage everyone seems to be feeling is ridiculous, I am just sitting here a little underwhelmed.
Which, I guess, means that I agree with Hamas too. Damn…
Why a Palestinian state is an awful idea
Posted by MK in Ideology, Middle East, Opinion, Political Science on March 31, 2011
I bet you’re all outraged right now, I would be too. For the record, a Palestinian state is not only a very good idea, but a necessity – there is no way this conflict will ever be solved otherwise.
But there’s one little caveat: it has to be reached through some sort of agreement. Not even a bilateral agreement, I woud argue that it has to be an agreement between Israel and the Palestinian authority, as well as the US, the Arab League, the UN and possibly the Hamas and the EU. Without all of those parties agreeing, there won’t truly be a solution. This is why the idea of Palestine unilaterally declaring a state scares me so much, but they keep threatening to do it:
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has been dropping hints that he will leave his post in September should negotiations with Israel not resume by then, and should there be no agreement about the establishment of a Palestinian state.
During a meeting in Ramallah with members of the Council for Peace and Security (who include former top IDF officers ), Abbas declared that the PA intends to work toward the establishment of a Palestinian state, and to win Israeli recognition for such a state. However, he indicated, if no accord is reached between the two sides, and if serious talks do not resume, the PA will turn to the UN General Assembly in September and request recognition of an independent Palestinian state.
Let me take you back to 1987. A lot of stuff happened in that year, good stuff. For instance, your humble author was born, meaning that you get to be reading this right now.
One thing that happened in 1987 is that Arafat declared a Palestinian state and had it recognised by a bunch of other UN states and was bringing it to the General Assembly (GA).
The next thing that happened was the first intifada.
You know what’s going to happen when the UN votes on this? If the UN rejects it, the Palestinian people will not be happy. If the UN accepts it, nothing will change on the ground, the Palestinian people will not be happy. What happens when the Palestinian people, en-masse, aren’t happy? An Intifada.
This also kind of means that Israel would no longer be in a grey area and would be actually breaking international law. Except that under international law, when one sovereign nation attacks another, that is mandate for a war of self-defence, which justifies occupying territory until the conflict is no longer a concern. Rocket attacks from Gaza? Hey, now Bibi has a mandate to re-occupy the territory. It’s also a great way to see checkpoints and curfews re-instated and life getting much worse for Palestinians in the West Bank. Plus there will be more terror attacks in Israel, which are never fun.
On the other hand, the GA has passed so many sanctions against Israel by now that if anything the GA ever did actually had an effect, Israel would have been abolished many times over. Regardless of a GA motion recognising Palestine, as long as the US still supports Israel in the Security Council, nothing will come of it.
Remember that every state who cares boycotts Israel anyway – all Islamic states have had official boycotts going back decades, most won’t even permit anyone to enter the country if they have an Israeli stamp in their passport. The only two with any kind of relationship with Israel are Egypt and Jordan.
If the US does stop supporting Israel over this (which is a possibility with Obama), that will make Israel completely isolated, which will make it feel alone and attacked. What do Israelis do when they feel alone and attacked? Vote Likkud – look at 1997, 2003, 2009 etc. What will Likkud do? change nothing. What happens then? Intifada.
This path will lead to war. That will undo all of the progress that the PA has made to get to the point where it could maybe run a state and bring us right back to 1987. It’s a very bad move, I sincerely hope that Abbas and Fayyad are just posturing.
A Palestinian state is necessary, but the way to get there is through cooperation and dialogue, not unilateral moves and certainly not violence.
For a little more background, see: Co-operation, not collision, with Israel is the only route out for the Palestinian Authority – On Line Opinion – 13/1/2011.
RSS This
