The Israel Situation » Anthony Reich

What Extremist Muslims Really Want

Anthony Reich — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 20:41:12 +0000

I have been watching the recent events in Egypt with growing concern and confusion. The people are clearly far from satisfied despite the fact that the hated Mubarak regime is long gone. The sight of former President Hosni Mubarak being wheeled into a Cairo courtroom on a stretcher, and seemingly in a comatose state, has not been enough to satisfy the protest movement’s calls for revenge. Continued protests on the streets of Cairo, and the death of over 70 supporters at a soccer match in Port Said late last week has confused me even further. I am desperately tying to understand what the protest movement in Egypt and the rest of the Arab world is truly seeking. More importantly, I am trying to figure out how this connects with the actions undertaken by extremist Muslims around the world.

Over the years, extremist Muslim countries have rejected western ideas and cultures. They have done all that they can to show abhorrence to technological developments, political systems and popular cultures that the western world has embraced. In many countries in the Muslim world, alcohol is prohibited, TV and Internet content is restricted and strictly policed and the participation of women in society is very limited. Of course, these facts have never stopped citizens and even leaders of Muslim countries from touring abroad to enjoy the “vices” that are prohibited in their home countries. It has also not stopped vast numbers of Muslims from departing the shores of their Muslim countries to set up home in the western world. Despite this, the message has continued to be loud and clear, that the western world has it wrong when permitting such policies and behaviours. Even extremist groups who have moved to live in western countries continue to preach this approach, almost like a subversive message from within the Muslim society that is trying to change the nature of the hosting country. Although other groups such as ultra-Orthodox Jews and Bible Belt Christians have also rejected certain popular cultures in western countries, the type of actions undertaken by extremist Muslims have been on a much greater, and often violent scale. These actions frequently represent a threat to the government of the country, and the safety of its citizens.

Ironically, the message that I see coming out of Egypt, Syria and other Arab Spring countries is exactly the opposite of the one that rejects western cultures. I see crowds of people turning on the traditional Muslim way of doing things, and trying to embrace western-style democracy, technology and freedoms. It is a well-known fact that the revolution in Tunisia was fuelled by Facebook and Twitter messages, exactly the type of culture that the Muslim world has worked so hard to reject.

When the Egyptians succeeded in overthrowing the Mubarak regime a little more than a year ago, and managed to achieve their dream of having the right to vote for their chosen government, the first thing that the did was elect the Muslim Brotherhood. It seems strange that they would support a party that is seemingly more extremist and less democratic than Mubarak ever was. After all the protest, fighting and bloodshed to get rid of Mubarak, this is a choice for less choice. The public has been so impatient for the new extremists to take over, that they have taken to the streets again in a bid to topple the military leadership that is temporarily running the country. The act of football fans turning on each other at the end of a game in Port Said, all in the name of political protest, is even more difficult to understand.

Trying to make sense of all the mixed messages is fairly tough. The only conclusion that I can reach, is that this is not a battle about the rights of individuals, or the ability to live a regular, safe life. This is all about power. In the first instance, it is about power over the individuals who live in the local country. The less freedom of choice there is, the greater the power. The less education and exposure to events and facts in the outside world, the greater the ability of the leadership to lie convincingly and to retain absolute power. Having gained control and power in a local way, this can then be utilised to confront the seemingly larger powers of the world – the great western powers. Being prepared to stand up to the international community and to the west is something that creates further power in the local country. There is nothing more impressive than the leader of a relatively small or insignificant country being seen to hold great western powers to ransom.

The Palestinians have achieved this, especially Hamas in Gaza, where the general population has been kept in abject poverty and uneducated while their leaders live in relative luxury, and frequently keep their families living abroad. The misery of the man in the street is blamed on the Israelis and the Americans, and on evil western culture. These tactics have also been successfully deployed by Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, the Taliban and the Muslim Brotherhood as well as by individuals like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Colonel Qaddafi, Arafat and many others. Muslim leaders over the years have trained their people to live in this way, and have taught them to feel some level of comfort and security in the style of leadership which leaves little room for freedom and choice. The Arab Spring, it seems, is not a protest against this style of leadership, but rather against those who have been the leaders. Attempts to implement western-style democracy in places like Iraq and Afghanistan have left these countries riddled with violence, and in politically unstable situations.

Muslims seem to respect those who are prepared to assume control and power, and who are willing and able to talk tough. They also seem to revere those who are prepared to kill innocent civilians, especially if these civilians are Israeli, Jewish or come from western countries. Shows of weakness in the form of sensitivity and understanding earn little respect. Those with the audacity to commandeer aircraft that crash into the World Trade Centre, or strap bombs to themselves to blow up restaurants and night clubs are regarded as heroes, and their families proclaim them as martyrs of the cause. To those of us who have been educated in a different system of values, these actions seem warped and misguided. This is the form of power that Muslims respect. Launching missiles in a haphazard fashion into populated areas is power, and threatening to use military force to wipe a country off the face of the earth is power. Allowing people the right to live in peace and security, when they wish the same for you, is weakness.

On this basis, the Arab Spring is simply a show of power against those who have held it for so long. If the west believes that this is a process of implementing new political systems or an indication that values are changing, a surprise is on the way. Those who make up the new leadership in the post-Spring period are more than likely to be the same as those who went before. This will bring a new cycle of clinging onto power at all costs, and for extended periods of time, until the next power-hungry group displaces them. If one uses these assumptions to explain behaviour in the Muslim world, many things fit into place.

It would be great to find a formula that is based on the giving and receiving of respect that allows citizens in Muslim and non-Muslim countries to live their daily lives without feeling physical or religious threat. It would be good to find a formula that allows citizens in Muslim countries the right to political self-expression, and facilitates the smooth transition from our government and leader to another. These formulae have been found and implemented in many western countries, alas they are lacking in the Muslim world. With no indication that they can be achieved anytime soon, prospects for more than 2 billion of the world’s population is not optimistic, and will continue to contribute to high levels of instability around the world.

Photo by Vancouver Sun.

What Extremist Muslims Really Want is a post from: The Israel Situation

Going Through the Motions

Anthony Reich — Sun, 29 Jan 2012 21:07:57 +0000

The most recent round of peace talks held between the Israelis and the Palestinians has been declared a failure by the Palestinians, Even though the talks were held at a low level, involving only negotiating representatives from each side, there always somehow seems a little more hope when a dialogue is taking place. In hindsight, it seems quite clear that there was never really any prospect that this round of talks would go anywhere. For the Palestinians, it was always a case of simply going through the motions to get safely to the next trigger point.

Following the unsuccessful attempts by the Palestinians to gain recognition from the UN Security Council and General Assembly in the summer of 2011, the Palestinians had promised the Quartet that they would give another round of talks a chance until the 26th January 2012. Having promised this, the Palestinians had no way of escaping from the commitment. Despite the fact that a total of 5 meetings were held in the current round between the parties in a very short period of time, all of which took place under the sponsorship of the Jordanian government in Amman, it became clear very early in the process that there was little intent on the part of the Palestinians to make this round work. Having seemingly exhausted its alternatives by making little progress at the UN, however, the question arises as to why the Palestinians were trying to torpedo these talks? With few alternatives to allow them to make progress towards their objective, it would appear that talks seem to be the best alternative for Mahmoud Abbas and the Fatah-controlled Palestinian Authority.

In order to better understand why the Palestinians sabotaged the latest talks, it is important to the sub-plots that are going on behind the scenes, and which are having more of an influence on the actions by President Abbas and chief negotiator Saeb Erekat. The first issue to address concerns the PA’s alternatives at the UN. Even though the UN Security Council and General Assembly seemingly had little interest in promoting the cause of the Palestinians at their meetings last year, the UN is quite a disparate organisation with many different tentacles that are often disconnected from each other. This was demonstrated when, soon after the failure at the General Assembly, the Palestinians did manage to win support for full membership to the UN cultural organisation UNESCO in October 2011. Although this was a poor consolation prize for main objective, it did demonstrate to the Palestinians that they could use a slower and indirect approach in order to work their way into the UN organisation. This includes the possibility of making use of the UN-sponsored International Court of Justice to charge Israelis with crimes against humanity arising from events in the recent Gaza War, Operation Cast Lead. The Palestinians have repeatedly threatened to make use of this avenue in their battle against Israel. Even if charges that they may bring through this court are ultimately dismissed, such actions could tie individual Israelis and the Israeli government up in legal proceedings for many years. By bringing the latest round of peace talks with Israel to an end, the prospect of stepping up actions through these UN organisations is placed firmly back on the table, and exactly where the Palestinians wish it to be.

The second sub-plot concerns the evolution of the relationship between Fatah and Hamas. The Palestinian Authority is controlled by Fatah, and with Mahmoud Abbas already serving his 8th year of a 4-year term, there is a great deal of pressure for elections to be held. Fatah is clearly reluctant to call elections when there is a real prospect of them being routed, even in their perceived stronghold of the West Bank. Many of these issues were taken care of, when a deal was signed between Hamas and Fatah to create a unity government for the Palestinian Authority. This deal is a typical attempt to extend the longevity of politicians on both sides of the divide, by denying the electorate the right to express its will through the ballot box. With Hamas being absolutely opposed to holding any negotiations with Israel at all, the establishment of the unity government was put on hold while the latest talks were held. Now, with the talks dead and buried, the blockage has been removed. For Fatah, entering into a closer relationship with Hamas may allow it to share in some of the popular support that Hamas continues to enjoy following recent prisoner exchange deal. It may also extend the political lives of some of the bigger names.

A further sub-plot in play concerns the ongoing events in the Arab World, and the events which have resulted from the “Arab Spring”. Mahmoud Abbas has announced that he will be taking the issue of the failed talks with the Israelis to the Arab League, to get direction as to what should happen next. With the Arab League occupied with events in Syria, Abbas may have a created a smokescreen under which to operate. Interestingly, the effects of the Arab Spring also seem to have created something of a split within Hamas, which may yet have an impact on the Palestinian Authority via the inclusion of Hamas in the unity government activities. The leadership that was formerly based in Damascus (reports suggest that Khaled Meshal and his team have fled the Syrian capital) feel that non-violent protest against Israel may be effective as a “Palestinian Spring”, after having seen the impact of the popular uprising in Syria and Egypt first-hand. The Gaza leadership is quite clear that it has no intention of adopting a new non-violent approach against Israel, and this issue may yet cause further internal conflict within the Palestinian camp.

The way in which the Palestinians went through the motions in the recent peace talks seemed a little more transparent than usual. Despite the fact that the talks were primarily addressing the issues of borders and security, an Israeli official was prevented from fully presenting Israel’s position on borders to the Amman meeting. An Israeli document setting out 21 points of principles needed to reach a peace agreement was not considered, and was then dismissed as being “just an outline”. These attempts to dismiss Israel’s honest efforts in the talks seem clearly designed to sabotage the talks. In the press, Israel’s border proposals have been labelled as “preventing a Palestinian state from being established”, and have been blamed for the breakdown of the talks.

In spite of the obvious reasons for the breakdown, the stale mate somehow seems still to have produced a slight edge for the Palestinian side. The breakdown of the talks has been presented by the international community by saying that the Palestinians have at least fulfilled their commitment to continue to try until the pre-agreed date of 26th January. Having tried and failed, all bets are off the table, but the rewards due to the Palestinians are triggered. European foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton even had the audacity to call upon Israel to deliver “confidence-building concessions” to encourage the talks to continue. We have already learned that this means delivering confidence to the international community, and concessions to the Palestinians. The Palestinian side seems not to be expected to deliver confidence nor the concessions. The international community would be better off understanding that any such concessions on Israel’s part, would amount to rewards to the Palestinians for bad behaviour.

It seems clear to me that a lasting peace will only be possible via a negotiated settlement. This was also recognised by Fatah strongman Marwan Barghouti, who remains in an Israeli jail serving five life sentences for murder of Israeli citizens. He made a rare court appearance during the last week, and managed to send out a message indicating that he believes in a negotiated settlement based on the 1967 borders. The precise terms of the negotiated settlement remain a large outstanding issue, but it is interesting that the person believed to be the instigator of both the first and second intifadas is talking about a negotiated settlement at all. The problem right now, is that there appear to be few Palestinians who believe that this is the correct route to take, and who are prepared to make the painful concessions necessary to bring this to reality. Until this happens, the Palestinians will be going through the motions, and the cycle of violence will continue.

Going Through the Motions is a post from: The Israel Situation

Hamas Reaches a Fork in the Road

Anthony Reich — Sun, 22 Jan 2012 21:18:40 +0000

It has been interesting to watch developments within Hamas over the past few months, and especially since the prisoner exchange deal which saw the release of Gilad Shalit. For Hamas, this has been a significant political event and has driven the organisation’s popularity to new heights amongst its Palestinian constituency. It seems as though this popularity has not reached all parts of the organisation, and that this great political event may even cause something of a split within Hamas.

Since Hamas was founded in 1987, there has been some tension between the so-called Gaza leadership, and the leadership based in exile. Until recently, the base in exile has been situated in the Syrian capital, Damascus. This is where Hamas Political Chief and Hamas Leader Khaled Meshaal has been based, together with his exile leadership team. On the other hand, Gaza Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh and his cabinet are the ones who are ruling over the Gaza Strip on a day-to-day basis, close to the grass roots support that keeps the organisation so popular. While Haniyeh does turn for guidance to Meshal in his capacity as the leader of the organisation, the truth of the matter is that the Gaza team is a fairly autonomous entity. Since the Gaza team succeeded in winning control of Gaza from Fatah in a coup d’état in 2007, they have steadily risen in stature within the Hamas organisation. Recent events have served to strengthen this position even further, to the point that the overall leadership of Hamas may see itself moving from the base in Damascus back to Gaza.

The rise in power of the Gaza leadership really began back in 2005, soon after the death of Yasser Arafat. This event gave the leaders in Gaza the opportunity to raise their profile on the ground, starting with the assertion of their authority against arch-rivals Fatah. The legislative elections held in 2006 were easily won by Hamas even though Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas managed to hang onto the presidency of the Palestinian Authority. A year later, Hamas supporters rose up against the Fatah rulers in Gaza, and asserted their authority on the streets. This brought their victory at the ballot box to reality. During this time, Hamas operatives kidnapped IDF soldier Gilad Shalit, and held him as a bargaining chip for more than 5 years. All the while, Hamas was firing missiles from Gaza into Israel and keeping the organisation’s name on the international stage. These events have helped to popularise Hamas amongst its supporters in Gaza, and amongst extremist Muslims around the world. This popularity has come at the expense of Fatah, but has also caused a split within the Hamas organisation itself. There is no doubt that the Gaza leadership has taken all the credit for these events at the expense of the Damascus leadership.

The Arab Spring has further weakened the Damascus leadership in a few different ways. It is reported that the instability in Damascus has resulted in the exile leadership being forced to move their office elsewhere. Although there is no confirmation of the new location for their office, they may be forced to remain fairly mobile in light of the events of the Arab Spring moving around the Middle East fairly rapidly. Meshal has also been influenced by the Arab Spring and decided to try to use its impetus to suggest the use of non-violent protest against Israel. This suggestion has been forcefully rejected by the Gaza leaders, who continue to subscribe to violent protest and ongoing firing of missiles towards Israel.

This is not the only major disagreement between Damascus and Gaza. The Damascus leadership has been very active in working on the negotiations with Fatah to reach an agreement on a unity government for the Palestinian Authority. Besides the compromises that each side has been forced to make to reach an agreement with the other, there is another key elephant in the room. This is the issue of the talks with Israel which are back on the table, albeit at a very low level. The Gaza leadership remains absolutely opposed to reaching any agreement with Fatah, all the time that Fatah is willing to enter into negotiations with Israel. This view seems to have prevailed over the past few weeks. Despite having signed an agreement to enter into a unity government with Fatah amidst some fanfare in Cairo, Hamas has taken no active steps towards making this agreement a reality.

These events culminated in an announcement last week that Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal has decided not to see re-election as the movement’s chief in elections which are due to take place later during 2012. This seems to be an acknowledgement on Meshaal’s part that he will be defeated in the election. Rather than be defeated, he would prefer to bow out in a more elegant way. Favourite to replace him is Ismail Haniyeh, leader in Gaza.

All of this indicates something of a radicalisation of Hamas in the future. The Gaza leadership is naturally much more radical than that in Damascus, and the future path of Hamas is bound to be strongly influenced by this. In addition, the rise to power of the Muslim Brotherhood across the border in Egypt is ominous. Hamas was founded as an off-spring of the Muslim Brotherhood, and continues to have a close relationship with this organisation. The Mubarak regime succeeded to some degree in limiting the flow of arms into Gaza from Egypt, but the floodgates will be open now that the Muslim Brotherhood is calling the shots in Cairo.

While there were indications of compromise and understanding coming from the Damascus leadership, this appears almost certainly to have been overruled by the approach of conflict and confrontation dictated by the Gaza leadership. This almost certainly means a continued schism within Palestinian politics between Fatah and Hamas. For Israel, this probably means that another Gaza operation, similar to Operation Cast Lead, is inevitable in response to the continued missile attacks that seem almost assured. In Middle East politics, this is a huge opportunity that will be missed.

Image by corbis.com.

Hamas Reaches a Fork in the Road is a post from: The Israel Situation

Racism Has No Place in the State of Israel

Anthony Reich — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 20:57:18 +0000

Israel is frequently accused of racism, particularly by those who continue to undermine her right to exist. Despite being forced to fight a war of survival against the Arab nations since independence in 1948, Israel continues to come under a microscope for the way in which she behaves towards Arabs who are Israeli citizens, and those who are not. It is a complex analysis, and not simply an issue of racism. Arab citizens have a completely different status in Israel. Their allegiance to the Jewish state in which they live and which feeds their every need, continues to be under suspicion. They have frequently been found to assist those who wish to destroy Israel. They are not obliged to serve in the nation’s army in the same way as others citizens are required to do. The relationship between Jew and Arab in Israel is not simply about race, but more about Jewish survival in the Jewish homeland. There is, however, another sort of racism that has reared its ugly head in Israel in recent times, and which needs to be stamped out before it is becomes unmanageable.

It seems that the practice of attempting to elevate the status of one population group at the expense of others is almost part of human instinct. Historically, Jews have been victims of those who have tried to increase their own social standing by putting down other weaker groups. The African nation has also suffered from this problem almost wherever their people have found themselves, both within Africa and elsewhere. In modern America, the Mexicans play the role of the fall guys, in India the caste system defines those who are at the bottom of the ladder, Gypsies in Europe are frequently discriminated against and Philippino workers in the countries of the Gulf of Arabia take their place at the bottom of society. This instinct has unfortunately not by-passed Israel.

In the early years of the State of Israel, the country was populated by two distinct groups of Jews. The first group escaped many years of persecution in Europe, and arrived in Israel out of the ruins of the Holocaust that ravaged their population and people. The second group had made their homes in Arab countries of the Middle East and North Africa, and had been forced to endure discrimination for many years, especially during the period when the Holocaust was ravaging Europe. This discrimination became even more acute after the birth of the State of Israel, and many were expelled from their homes. Those in the European group were generally better educated and were well versed in European culture, while those in the Middle Eastern group were less exposed to western values, education and culture. Many clashes took place between these groups, and the human instinct came out in their attempts to elevate themselves to make themselves better than the others. The horrific discrimination that each group had been forced to endure in the years prior to their arrival in Israel had a significant influence on their attempts to better themselves, even at the expense of others. After having been treated as the dregs of society for so long, each group was eager to elevate themselves to the top of society. To be at the top, you need to have somebody who is below you. Hence was born racism and discrimination in Israel, which manifested itself largely in the form of European Jews discriminating against Middle Eastern Jews. The fact that the Middle Eastern Jews were also generally darker skinned than their European counterparts also somehow fitted the standard expectations of discrimination, even though the darker skin was not the source of the discrimination. Despite the fact that these discriminatory views have presented their problems over the years, it is pleasing to note that the problem has been substantially diluted by inter-marriage and the blurring of edges between the two groups. It is also notable that representatives from both groups have reached the upper echelons of business, politics and academia. Nobody will ever forget where they and their families have come from, but the future in Israel looks less defined by these two groups than was previously the case.

Recently, however, racism has again become evident, this time against another weaker population group in Israel. In operations starting in 1984, Jews from Ethiopia were airlifted to Israel in large numbers. Operation Moses saw some 8,000 people brought to Israel and this was followed up with further operations which brought a total of about 80,000 people to Israel. Today, the Ethiopian community in Israel numbers over 120,000. The Ethiopians have become easy targets for discrimination for a number of reasons, and many have taken advantage of this situation

Upon their arrival in Israel, the Ethiopian community was forced to take on an entirely new environment. Many of them had never seen a flush toilet in operation or slept in a bed that was not on the ground. This learning process put them in a very weak position, and made it easy for others to take advantage of them. The Ethiopians show a gentle and mild temperament, and are not outspoken or loud in their actions. In the Israeli aggressive and rough-and-tumble environment, their gentleness is interpreted as weakness. In the Israeli context of whoever screams loudest and shows most aggression will get what they want, the Ethiopian community has lost out significantly. Even though the Ethiopian community has been forced to take on many of the ways of the modern Israeli environment, they have still done their best to maintain some of their traditions and practices from their days in the deserts of Africa. Many of these practices are very different from those in use by other Israelis, and cause some level of friction in residential neighbourhoods. This friction crossed the line last week when it was revealed that residents of some apartment buildings in Kiryat Malachi, had banded together in a pact not to sell apartments in their block to Ethiopian families.

What these people had not realised, is that there is a new type of person that has arisen within the Ethiopian community over the past ten years or so. This is a group of teenagers and young adults who were born in Israel, and have grown up with Israeli style of doing business. While these people are strongly influenced from the home by the traditional Ethiopian style of living, they also know the kind of action that is needed in Israel to be heard and to get what they want. These young adults led other members of the Ethiopian community out onto the streets in protest against the racist practices that are making things difficult for their community. This protest captured the attention of the media and of the nation. It reached the highest levels of the political establishment, and President Shimon Peres responded by visiting a school in Jerusalem that caters to a large number of Ethiopian students. He shared with them his experiences of coming to Israel from Poland at the age of 11, and the taunts that he was forced to endure as a result of his lack of Hebrew and different style of dress. He reassured the children by saying that he found his way of fitting into Israeli society, and he is proof that they can achieve whatever they want – even becoming president of the state.

The Ethiopian community includes some of the most genuine people to be found in Israel today. They gave up everything they knew and their style of living in Africa to come to the Jewish homeland. Despite the fact that their lives and communities have literally been turned upside down by moving to Israel, they are delighted to be in Israel to be allowed to practice their Jewish faith and peace and without the fear of anti-Semitism. They have suffered every sort of discrimination known to any group of people in Israel. Even the Israeli government stands accused of discriminating against the Ethiopians in terms of the help and assistance provided to them. Many were forced to convert as the Jewishness was not recognised at the same time as blood relatives had been accepted as Jewish. The amount of money allocated to the process of acclimatising the Ethiopian community has been a fraction of that required. And yet, they are simply delighted to be in the Land of Israel. While it is understood that not everybody can feel comfortable with the style of living and practices of the Ethiopians, this cannot be the cause of racism.

No matter what the cause of racism, it needs to be stamped out. This is particularly true in a country like Israel where racism has no place at all. The weaker members of our society, usually those who are the victims of discrimination, require greater help and support rather than actions to increase their hardship. This is particularly true of groups like the Ethiopians who have been forced to undergo dramatic changes to their way of life and to the environment in which they live.

It is only by banding together and strengthening the weaker parts of our society, that we will also have the strength to fight the war of survival. The Ethiopians have more than demonstrated their allegiance to this cause, and their willingness to participate in the defence of the State of Israel. The other citizens of Israel need to do all that they can to support and respect this.

Image by reutrcohen.com

Racism Has No Place in the State of Israel is a post from: The Israel Situation

Justice Prevails

Anthony Reich — Sun, 08 Jan 2012 22:17:10 +0000

The meeting of the Judicial Appointments Committee on Friday turned out to be something of a pleasant anti-climax. In a meeting that lasted only 90 minutes, four new justices were duly appointed to the bench of the Israeli Supreme Court. The cordial nature of the meeting and the appointments seemed to conceal the less-than-cordial path that led to this moment.

Israel’s Supreme Court plays a very central role in Israeli society. In addition to acting as an appellate court, it also acts as a High Court of Justice in which decisions by government and state authorities can be challenged and set aside. The right of the Supreme Court to set aside government decisions creates a critical place for it in Israeli democracy. It is little wonder that the appointment of new justices to the bench of this court is such an important and controversial exercise. Once appointed to the Supreme Court, justices serve until they are seventy years of age and cannot be removed except under extreme circumstances. The judges on the bench need to be act independently of government, and need to be seen to act independently of government to maintain their important role as defender of democracy.

For some time now, certain ultra-Orthodox and right-wing citizens of Israel have protested that decisions by the Supreme Court have discriminated against their views and positions. While many Israelis have regarded the court’s decisions as representing the voice of reason in situations which have seemed wholly unreasonable, some groups feel discriminated against by these decisions. Surprisingly, it seems as if this view was not only shared by extremists. In the lead-up to the meeting of the Judicial Appointments Committee, the Minister of Justice and the Prime Minister threatened to become caught up in a judicial appointments row. Their actions pointed unashamedly to the fact that they also subscribe to the view that the bench of the Supreme Court has become too left-wing. Certain actions and statements on their behalf attempted to influence the makeup of the Judicial Appointments Committee in the hope that this may influence the appointment of the Supreme Court judges towards their right-wing views.

The nine-man Judicial Appointments Committee includes two members who are appointed by the Israeli Bar Association. The remaining seven members of the committee are made up of three sitting judges of the Supreme Court, two ministers and two members of Knesset. The two Bar Association representatives are chosen in a vote that is conducted according to a simple majority. The two representatives were chosen to the satisfaction of the Bar Association, and this revealed that one representative was somebody known to be politically left of centre. Individuals close to the Minister of Justice embarked upon a campaign to retroactively change the rules by which the Bar Association candidates were selected, in order to replace the left-wing representative. It was hoped that this would ensure that the right-wing candidates to the bench would be appointed. This attempt to undermine the due process of appointment of justices is shameful, and can be seen as an attempt to meddle with an important arm of the democracy of our nation. No person is larger than the system, and no individual should be allowed to undermine the operation of a process that is so fundamental to the democracy of the country.

Ultimately, the attempts to change the rules retroactively were unsuccessful, and the original vote of the Bar Association stood. Their two representatives took their place on the Judicial Appointments Committee and four new judges were appointed. Despite the controversy and shenanigans leading up to the vote, the four new candidates can be seen as typifying compromise and organisation. Justice Noam Sohlberg lives in Alon Shvut on the West Bank, and was elected by eight of the nine committee members as a representative of the right. Justice Zvi Zylbertal was elected unanimously as a candidate from the left. He is regarded as being very close to retiring Judge President Dorit Beinisch. Justice Uri Shoham was also elected unanimously, and is seen to represent those of North African and Middle Easter (Mizrachi) origin. Finally, Justice Daphne Barak-Erez received unanimous support as the only female new judge.

Whereas in the USA, the appointment of judges is a highly politicised process and is a good way for presidents to leave a legacy long after the end of their presidential term, in Israel this has not been the case until now. It may, however be set to change in the future, even though it seems as though this would be an unfortunate development. Due to the fact that the Israeli Supreme Court is frequently called upon to adjudicate matters which have strong political overtones, it is important that the bench should be as politically impartial as possible. This is particularly true when living in a society with so many minority groupings. Citizens should feel confident that the Supreme Court will judge fairly and independently on each case that is brought before the court. On this occasion, democracy has ensured that even the Minister of Justice was unable to influence the process of justice. This is real democracy in action.

Justice Prevails is a post from: The Israel Situation

The Best and The Worst of 2011

Anthony Reich — Sun, 01 Jan 2012 21:27:42 +0000

As we welcome 2012, it gives the opportunity to reflect on the best and worst parts of 2011. In Israel, 2011 was an eventful year, including a number of interesting and challenging events. For some, it was a year that they would prefer to forget. Despite many negative aspects to the year, I think that Israelis will regard 2011 as having been a year that was more positive than negative. Here are the main reasons why I think that this was the case.

The best story coming out of 2011 was the release of captured Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit. It is not only the fact that Gilad was returned safely to the arms of his family that makes this story good. The fact that the Israeli government was finally able to agree and execute this deal sends some amazingly strong and positive statements to all Israelis. For me, this is a classic story where the right thing finally triumphed. Like all good stories, this has a negative side to it as well. I really cannot blame all of those who opposed the deal due to the “price” that had to be paid in terms of the number of Palestinian prisoners who were released, even those who have murdered Israelis. I also know how paranoid the Israel Defense Force (IDF) is about the possibility of soldiers being kidnapped in the future, and the measures that have been put in place to try to avoid this at any price. I feel that working to avoid future kidnappings is a better reaction than leaving Gilad in captivity under the conditions that he was held. This was, by far, the highlight of the year in my view.

Another good story of 2011 was that of the social protests. Hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets to demonstrate against lack of social justice, and of the dramatic increases in the cost of living without commensurate increases in earnings. This was a great story for a number of reasons. It was good to see the Israeli public having the time and energy to devote to social issues, and behaving in a manner that most “normal” countries behave. In the 63 years since Israel’s independence, most of the time has been spent worrying about an existential threat. Wars have been fought, terror attacks overcome and many people have been left dead and injured. This allows little time or energy to give even a fleeting thought to daily social issues. The fact that hundreds of thousands of Israelis were able to come out into the street to protest social issues gives some indication that the existential threat is not quite at the same level as it has been in the past. It also shows what Israelis really care about, and shows the real democracy that exists in Israel. On all of these levels, the protests were extremely encouraging. These good points, however, should not cause us to lose sight of the core issue of these protests – the economic inequality and hardships that many people are suffering. Unfortunately, the government has not responded sufficiently to the message of the protest marches, and this issue is likely to plague us for some time yet.

A further good story for 2011 was the extent to which the economy succeeded in holding up during the year. Even though this seems to be at odds with the message brought by the social protest movement, more Israelis were in employment during 2011 than at any other time in Israel’s history. In addition, while economies around the world were floundering and suffering all types of economic problems, Israel somehow managed to keep its economy on track. This does not mean that the year translated into a boom year for Israel. It does, however, continue the theme of displaying a real underlying strength to Israel’s economy that was shown during 2008 when the credit crunch hit many economies so hard. Once again in 2011, Israel’s economy has performed admirably. Along with the good things, come some very difficult questions. Why are so many Israelis struggling financially when the economy is at almost full employment? This is clearly something that needs to be addressed as part of the social equality agenda.

The major regional story this year was the unfolding of the Arab Spring in countries in the Middle East and North Africa. The way in which the Arab Spring has swept through the region could never have been predicted. Even though this is great news for democracy in the Middle East, it has created an instability that is proving to be negative for Israel, and many countries in the western world. While the free world has an obligation to support the move towards democracy in principle, there is a real problem about whether these countries are really ready to embrace democracy. In many respects, stability in the Arab world is more important than democracy. As things seem at the moment, the two don’t seem to be able to live side by side. The change of regime in Egypt is particularly concerning, with the increasing popularity of the Muslim Brotherhood. The protest movement in Syria also promises some dramatic changes to regional politics, and they are not necessarily all going to be positive.

The second major regional story surrounds Iran’s development of nuclear weapons. 2011 can be characterised as a year of confirmation and inaction where this is concerned. The international community were presented with irrefutable evidence of Iran’s development of nuclear missiles. Even the International Atomic Energy Agency were forced to accept that Israel’s representations about Iran’s nuclear program have been correct all along. Having had this fact confirmed, the best that the international community could muster up, were a few ineffectual sanctions. It has become clear that Iran is not only setting out to threaten Israel. The events over the past few days in the Straits of Hormuz are a clear challenge to the US. The military exercise on this occasion closed the straights for only a short period of time. The next time could be for longer, precipitating a potential military conflict with the USA.

Despite the fact that 2011 was a hugely eventful year, it seems only to have set the scene for what awaits us in 2012. Israel’s social justice movement is likely to be more vociferous, particularly if the economy suffers more than it did in 2011. The government will need to be prepared to commit to spend more money on social issues, and to see these promises through. This is an issue that is no less imporant than Israel’s security challenges.

The Arab Spring will come to a head in Syria. It seems as though the Sunni Muslims, who represent over 70% of the population, are likely to gain the ascendancy after having been ruled by the minority Alawites for many years. The Spring could yet spread to other countries in the region, and this could present a greater threat to Israel as more of her neighbours became destabilised by these events.

I expect that 2012 will also see the Iranian nuclear issue come to a head, as Iran continues to intimidate and provoke Israel, the USA and other western countries. All of this adds up to 2012 looking to be a tough year.

In between the pessimistic expectations are a few rays of light. Even though I expect a great deal of instability during 2012, it is my hope that this will then bring a period of greater stability as is often the case. I also hope that the unfolding Arab Spring can create a new, more compromising, reality with the Palestinians to allow moves towards a genuine peace based on mutual recognition and respect.

It is my hope and prayer that 2012 holds only great things for all of you. Happy new year!!

Image by www.photobucket.com

The Best and The Worst of 2011 is a post from: The Israel Situation

Gender Segregation Pushed Too Far

Anthony Reich — Sun, 25 Dec 2011 22:53:59 +0000

Despite many indications that Israel is a country that appears to promote gender equality more than most other countries around the world, there have been worrying signs of greater gender segregation creeping into some aspects of Israeli society recently. Israel’s Golda Meir was only the third female prime minister in the world, and Israeli women are required to serve in the Israeli army in the same way as their male counterparts. Yet this is the same country which closes entire streets off to the use of women, and requires them to sit at the back of the bus while their male counterparts sit at the front.

Ultra-Orthodox groups in Jerusalem and elsewhere around Israel, have been increasingly trying to enforce greater gender segregation. There is also already fairly strict gender segregation enforced in ultra-Orthodox neighbourhoods such as Jerusalem’s Mea Shearim. This is tolerable inasmuch as those who are subject to the segregation, are those who subscribe to it. For the people living in Mea Shearim, gender segregation is part of their belief system and lifestyle. Women are raised with this from birth, attend separate schools and are readied to take on separate traditional roles in the home and society. Visitors to Mea Shearim know that this is the way in which things work in this neighbourhood, and are invited to stay away if this is objectionable to them.

The problem arises when supporters of gender segregation allow this to creep out into the general public, thereby affecting those who do not subscribe to it. This has already long been the case in Jerusalem, with advertisers refusing to show images of women on buses and billboards for fear of them being defaced by ultra-Orthodox protestors. Despite a court order prohibiting gender segregation in specific streets, even in ultra-Orthodox neighbourhoods, residents of Mea Shearim set up separation barriers on Mea Shearim Street and Shivtei Yisrael Street during the recent Succot holiday. The hard-line Toldot Aharon Hassidic sect were holding events relating to the holiday on locations in these streets, and were prohibiting women from approaching even near to these locations.

Two recent events have brought the gender segregation to a head, and have forced politicians and religious leaders to speak out on the issue. The first event was a walkout of a military ceremony by religious soldiers when women soldiers began to sing at the ceremony. The protestors subscribe to the so-called “kol isha” prohibition, which forbids males from hearing women sing. The IDF’s general staff has refused to back down on this issue. The protesting soldiers were not given permission to leave the ceremony , and have been disciplined for their behaviour. The military authorities have refused to heed calls to ban singing by women in future ceremonies. This has brought the military into direct conflict with some ultra-Orthodox groups.

The second incident took place on a bus that was designated as a gender-separate service, something that has become more popular in Israel in recent years. This means that women are required to sit at the back of the bus, while their male counterparts get to sit in the front. Upon entering the bus, Tanya Rosenblit was requested by one of the religious males to sit in the ladies’ section at the bank. In a protest which was reminiscent of the actions by Rosa Parks in Montgomery, Alabama in the 1950s, Tanya refused to relocate to the back of the bus. This sparked a stand-off in which the bus was halted and the police called. In a statement after the incident, Rosenblit said that she had shown respect by dressing modestly because she knew she was going into a religious area. She refused, however, to be humiliated by being forced to sit at the back of the bus. She has taken on a somewhat heroic status in the eyes of many, by being prepared to stand up to the religious coercion, something that few women have been prepared to do.

Israeli Chief Rabbi, Yona Metzger, came out recently saying that religious people are entitled to live their lives as they see fit, but they have no right to impose their views on the general public and in public areas. Prime Minister Netanyahu announced at the Sunday morning cabinet meeting that Israel is a liberal democracy, and that public spaces are made available to men and women to use equally in a safe and open way. The police will arrest those who spit, raise their hand or harass others. These statements will sadly have no bearing at all on those who perpetrate gender segregation. They do not respect these leaders, nor take note of anything they say. They subscribe only to the leadership of the rabbinical leaders of their sects, and will only be guided by their statements.

It is ironic that these events take place at the same time that it is announced that no fewer than 5 female pilots and navigators, the most ever, will graduate from this year’s air force flight instruction course. It is only 16 short years since Alice Miller succeeded in challenging the prohibition on women being admitted to the flight instruction course. Since then, many women have graduated from this course to serve their country with great distinction. This year, 5 more women will join their distinguished ranks. This is closer to the Israel that most of us know, a country which does support the equality of women in our society and which does encourage women to play a full role.

Despite the insistence by religious groups to enforce greater gender segregation and become more extreme in their views and actions, it seems unlikely that the greater public and the politicians will tolerate this. While this does not mean that religious groups will be forced to dilute their religious observance, it simply means that they will be forced to limit their extreme views to their own environments, while allowing others to live their lives without being dictated to. Surely this is the correct answer.

Image by www.mizozo.com

Gender Segregation Pushed Too Far is a post from: The Israel Situation

Religious Bus Lines

The Apple Never Falls Far From the Tree

Anthony Reich — Sun, 18 Dec 2011 22:50:14 +0000

Many were taken by surprise last week when it was announced that the Apple Corporation has decided to open a development centre in Israel. The main reason for the surprise, is the fact that Apple’s strategy to date has been to centralise all of its development effort at its corporate headquarters in Cupertino, California. The Israeli development centre will be the first one that Apple will open outside of the Cupertino headquarters. Has this new step been enabled by the recent departure and demise of former Apple CEO and icon, Steve Jobs? Perhaps so. Upon closer examination, however, it becomes clear that the direction in which new CEO Tim Cook is taking the company, is not far removed from the strategy which Jobs pursued so successfully prior to his death.

Apple’s meteoric rise in recent years has largely been driven by the innovation of its range of new products. This has not been the only contributing factor to Apple’s success. In addition to bucking the trend by developing products and features which are different and exciting in a world which is oversupplied by all manner of electronic goods, Apple has also succeeded in achieving gross profit margins in excess of 40% on its sales. This is far higher than its peer group of hardware vendors. The way that Apple has achieved this, is by taking full control of its supply chain. This has not necessarily required the acquisition of key suppliers, although this has been done on more than a few occasions. Rather, the way in which this control has been achieved is by securing large volumes of required components ahead of time. By doing this, Apple has succeeded in avoiding seasonal fluctuations in supply volumes and prices, even though it has required a substantial commitment of capital. It is this strategy that has led Apple to Israel, and ultimately led it to the decision to establish a development centre here.

Apple’s products rely heavily on flash memory, and the company spends billions of dollars a year in acquiring these components. Israeli company Anobit has been a supplier of NAND flash memory to Apple, and develops systems for improving this component. Apple has decided that acquiring Anobit could save it 10-20% on its purchase of flash memory each year, and Anobit has been put firmly on Apple’s shopping list. Acquiring Anobit may also allow Apple to cut off the company’s cooperation with Samsung, one of Apple’s fiercest rivals in the field of smartphones and tablets. Anobit seems also to have been a catalyst for Apple’s interest in Israeli technology, and appears to have influenced the decision taken by Apple to set up a development centre in Israel. This centre will focus primarily on semiconductor development, a field that Israeli companies have excelled in over the years.

Even though the marriage between Apple and Israeli technological development seems obvious to some, it still requires a champion within a large company to drive through an initiative of this sort. In Apple’s case, the decision to open a development centre in Israel has been championed by former Haifa resident Johnny Srouji, who was hired by Apple 3 years ago. He has risen in the ranks of Apple to the level of vice president. Now, the Israeli press is full of details of the fact that Apple has been searching for premises in Haifa which are reputed to be large enough to house as many as 250 employees. Israeli high-tech veteran Aharon Aharon has been hired to head up the new Apple development centre.

Companies such as Intel, Microsoft and Google have enjoyed tremendous success by using Israeli brainpower. It is no secret that it was Israeli engineers who helped Intel to break through significant barriers in the development of their processors. This has contributed, in no uncertain terms, to Intel’s continued successes over the years. Now, Apple has decided to also tap into this pool of talent to help take its products to the next level. It is expected that Israeli expertise in flash storage could help to speed up iPhones and iPads, as well as the data transfer between them.

Apple representatives have said that the company will continue to open the new development centre even if the deal to acquire Anobit does not go ahead. The truth is, that either one of these acts on Apple’s part would come as a huge compliment to Israeli hi-tech and engineering. Both deals being done would surely make Apple a substantial player in Israel’s technology sector, and will place Israeli technology at the forefront of the world’s leading-edge products. This is a great achievement for the previous generations of Israeli engineers, and a fantastic incentive for the next generation in order to keep Israeli hi-tech to reach greater heights.

Despite the fact that Israeli technology has already received recognition as amongst the best in the world, the decision by Apple to open its first development centre outside of California is a fantastic accolade.

Image by djsunner-xboy

The Apple Never Falls Far From the Tree is a post from: The Israel Situation

Israeli Posed for NBA Draft First Round

How to Bring Israelis Home

Anthony Reich — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 06:13:07 +0000

The Jewish Agency recently took a decision to make a change to their usual activities to attract Jews to come and live in the Jewish homeland. Until now, the activities of the Jewish Agency have been focused towards attracting Jews who have lived their lives in the Jewish Diaspora, to come and make their homes in Israel. They have concentrated on two main targets. Firstly, they have concentrated on Jewish communities at risk or in need, such as the Jews in Morocco, Yemen, Russia and Ethiopia who were shipped to Israel in large projects, and sometimes in some haste. The Jewish Agency has also focused on attracting the attention of Jews in communities which were not under threat, such as Jews in the USA, the UK, South Africa, Australia, South America and other locations. The tactics employed in these communities has largely targeted the youth and the young adults to experience the vibrancy that Israel offers people of this age, in the hope that parents and other family members will follow the youngsters to Israel.

The new campaign that the Jewish Agency has embarked upon recently is aimed at an entirely different community. This time, the Jewish Agency is trying to attract former Israelis to come back home. In some parts of the world, and particularly around the USA, fairly large groups of former-Israelis (or yordim as they are sometimes known) have established themselves. It is estimated that as many as half a million Israelis live in the USA, and that this number has grown by 30,000 in the past ten years alone. Most yordim continue to have a close connection with Israel, and visit members of their family on a fairly frequent basis. Although many voice an intention to return to live in Israel at some point in the future, the numbers of yordim continues to grow. The link to Israel for these people is stronger during times of security crisis. They obviously have a strong concern for individual friends and family who may be at risk during times of unrest, and those who are serving in the IDF during periods of war. There is a concern, however, that their link to Israel and Judaism gets weaker the longer they live outside of Israel.

The Jewish Agency campaign to try to convince yordim to return home, has caused a great deal of negative reaction in the USA where adverts have appeared on billboards in areas where large communities of Israelis reside. This has been supported by online video adverts that have been launched. The campaign focuses largely on the fact that the intermarriage of children of yordim may result in assimilation. One video advert shows Israel grandparents communicating with their grandchild, in the USA on Chanukah. The parents ask what holiday the child is celebrating, to which he answers “Christmas”. In another advert, a yored father is upset by the fact that his child is calling him “daddy” rather than “abba”. The message is clear. The longer these people stay in their current environments, the more assimilated they become.

The Jewish community in the USA has come out in strong objection to the advertising campaign. The main reason for their objection is that the assimilation referred to in the adverts is not limited to Israelis who marry non-Jews. It also includes the situation where Israelis marry Diaspora Jews. This is particularly reflected in advert which shows a young Israeli woman watching a Yom Hazikaron ceremony on-line, while her American husband is seeing asking her to go out to a party. The insinuation that American Jews are somehow disconnected, is seen as being a slap in the face of the Jewish community in the USA, and their attempts to maintain their Judaism and their links to Israel. I can understand the insult felt by the USA Jewish communities. Apparently the Israeli government has also understood this as they have pulled the campaign since the uproar flared up.

As much as the campaign is disparaging towards the American Jewish community, it also contains a great deal of truth. There can be no doubt that assimilation has ravaged the world’s Jewish population in the period following the Shoah, particularly that in the USA. Recent statistics suggest that 40-50% of American Jews marry non-Jews. Of these, only 33% provide their children with a Jewish upbringing. This means that there is an increasing number of “Jewish” children who are not halachically Jewish due to their mothers not converting to Judaism. There are also a large number of children who are simply lost to Judaism as a result of their Jewish parent marrying a non-Jew, and the family not identifying with the Jewish community at all. This trend will have an impact on the Israeli community in the USA as well, even those who have a strong national identification with the State of Israel.

Israel has one of the few Jewish communities in the world that are growing. This is not only because of aliyah and population growth. It is also because there is much less of a problem of assimilation in Israel. It is sometimes amusing to note the effect of the Jewish and Israeli national holidays, even on the non-Jewish foreign workers in Israel. It is simply impossible for a child in Israel, even those raised in homes that don’t have a strong sense of Jewish identity, to miss a Jewish festival or not to be familiar with its main aspects. This must surely be a strong reason why it is right to do all that we can to attract Israelis back home, as much as we wish to attract others to make Israel their home. While I have a great deal of respect for the efforts made by the Jews in the USA and elsewhere to identify with Judaism and Israel, I feel that the only way to assure ourselves of Jewish continuity is to have as many Jews in Israel as possible.

How to Bring Israelis Home is a post from: The Israel Situation

Egypt’s Elections Produce a Surprise Package

Anthony Reich — Sun, 04 Dec 2011 11:24:53 +0000

The Arab Spring uprisings began exactly 1 year ago this month. The demonstrations against the government of President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in Tunisia began in December 2010, and resulted in him being removed from power 1 month later. The Spring subsequently spread to many other countries in the Middle East, and has been encouraged by enthusiastic support from the western countries. Ironically, the one voice of hesitation against the uprisings came from Israel. At the time, it was difficult for many to understand why Netanyahu did not support the Spring whole-heartedly. Now, a year later, his reasons are starting to become apparent.

Netanyahu’s concern about the uprisings were most obvious when the demonstrations reached Egypt, and thousands of Egyptians gathered in Tahrir Square demanding the head of President Hosni Mubarak. It was clear that Mubarak had ruled with an iron fist in the 30 years that he had presided over Egypt. He was never elected in a free democratic election, and he never repealed the emergency laws under which his government and his security apparatus were entitled to do almost as they wished, and which they used to maximum effect. Most citizens around the world who have lived in a democratic system (as well as many who have not) felt some level of empathy with Egyptians as they demanded, and finally got, the resignation of their president. Netanyahu’s voice was a lone one during that time, and it seemed strange to many that the leader of a free and democratic country would express concern about the democratisation of another country. There were silent whispers about whether the relationship between Mubarak and Netanyahu held more than what was publicly known. There were mutterings about whether the gas deal that was struck between Egypt and Israel, and which Mubarak’s family are reputed to have personally profited from, possibly held personal profits for Israel’s leaders too. All the while, Netanyahu was heard to speak out in understated tones about his concerns for the Arab Spring.

Fast forward 11 months since the day that it was announced that Mubarak had resigned from power, and how different the situation looks. Egypt has undergone its first round of voting in its nascent democratic process, and things are looking distinctly worrying for Israel and the west. Voting for the lower house of Egypt’s parliament has revealed that Islamic extremist groups are likely to rule in the new Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood, which was held responsible for the assassination of former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and which remained a banned organisation throughout the 30 years of Mubarak’s rule, has emerged as the strongest party in the elections. There are those who believe that this support comes as a result of euphoria over the unbanning of the Muslim Brotherhood, not unlike the euphoria which saw the ANC sweep to power in South Africa after it was unbanned. There are those, however, who believe that this reflects a trend towards Islamic fundamentalism that can be seen in many countries around the world. This is borne out by the meteoric rise of the Salafist Al-Nour party which received the second highest number of votes in the first round. The Salafists advocate greater Islamic fundamentalism than the Muslim Brotherhood, and wish to apply Islamic Sharia law to Egypt. The make the Muslim Brotherhood look like amateur fundamentalists.

The fact that the Muslim Brotherhood had strong showings in the elections in Tunisia and Morocco, is not nearly as concerning as the indications of the trend in Egypt. Besides the fact that Egypt has a direct land border with Israel, Egypt also enjoys a strategic position both geographically and politically in the current fragile state of international diplomacy. Is the election result in Egypt showing that some countries are not yet ready to cope with western-style democracy, as so many people claim? Or is the truth that Hosni Mubarak’s iron fist also worked to protect the west against the scourge of Islamic fundamentalism? Netanyahu seems to have been one of the only western leaders who understood this at a stage that it was still early enough to do something. Unfortunately, his was very much a lone voice, and he had no prospect of stemming the tide towards the overthrow of Mubarak.

The Israeli establishment understood as soon as Mubarak left power that Israel’s relationship with Egypt has changed forever. There are some doubts as to whether the peace treaty signed between late Prime Minister Menachem Begin and late President Anwar Sadat will be respected by the new regime. Even if it is, a new era has dawned for Israel and Egypt. This will also manifest itself in Israel’s relationship with the Palestinians. The Muslim Brotherhood is a close ally of Hamas. Whereas President Mubarak worked hard with the Israelis to try to prevent Hamas from acquiring weapons into the Gaza Strip, the Muslim Brotherhood is likely to do the exact opposite. This promises greater and more sophisticated attacks coming from Gaza, spelling real danger for southern Israel, and for the safety and security of the State of Israel as a whole.

It will be interesting to watch what sort of political system will manifest itself in post-Gaddafi Libya. In this case, western countries were actively involved in overthrowing Gaddafi by supplying NATO air power to assist rebel forces against him. Now, they will be forced to stand back to allow a new democratic government to replace the old dictatorship. But who will be the new elected leaders of Libya, and could it be that the west may yet come to regret this too? Sometimes, you need to be careful what you wish for.

Egypt’s Elections Produce a Surprise Package is a post from: The Israel Situation