Sohrab Amari: The EU Picks Iran and Hamas
From the mullahs’ nuclear-weapons program to Hamas’s calculated campaign to rush the barrier fence with Israel to the Iranian-led insurgency in Yemen, Mogherini and the EU see only diplomatic challenges to overcome. And the answer is always, always to convene a gabfest in Basel, Lausanne, Vienna or some other plush Continental city, where civilizational clashes and historic animosities and sharp moral contrasts can be dissolved in technical solutions.
Never mind that the Iranian nuclear deal on its own terms puts Tehran on the glide path to the bomb, and never mind that it fails to address the mullahs’ missile program, regional aggression, and human-rights violations. “We had a process,” say the Brussels mandarins, “and that process must be preserved at all costs.” Never mind that Hamas is constitutionally committed to the destruction of world Jewry and has been staging terror attacks and bloody stunts for decades. “We had a process,” say the mandarins, “and Trump’s embassy move disrupts the process.” In this worldview, the likes of Iran and the Palestinians can appear as friends and good guys, because they cynically embrace European process games. All the while, the U.S. and Israel are cast as the bad guys since they don’t play geopolitics the European way.
Along with Mogherini, Barack Obama and Angela Merkel epitomized this bankrupt mindset. One of the three, Obama, has already exited the world stage. The tectonic electoral shifts underway in Europe mean the other two are likely to fade sooner than later.
Palestinian Media Watch was invited to the Israeli parliament’s Foreign Affairs and Defense committee once again last week for the latest debate on new legislation to deduct the amount the Palestinian Authority pays terrorists and their families from Israel’s tax transfers to the PA.
In order to impress upon members of Parliament the horror of the PA practice of paying salaries to terrorists, PMW produced 13 small posters with information about a number of Palestinian terrorists, their hundreds of victims and how much money the PA has paid each of the terrorists since they were arrested.
PMW’s Director, Itamar Marcus, and Head of Legal Strategies, Maurice Hirsch, both actively participated in the debate. In addition, PMW had invited relatives of terror victims who also spoke at the hearing, demanding that Israel not transfer any money to the PA that might go to pay salaries to the murderers of their loved ones. Some of them held up PMW’s posters while they spoke, documenting how much money the PA has already paid the terrorist who murdered their relatives.
Caroline Glick: Pompeo Presents the Trump Doctrine
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s speech Monday at the Heritage Foundation marked a pivotal moment in U.S. foreign policy.
Pompeo made several important arguments in the course of his half hour address, in which he set out President Donald Trump’s policy regarding Iran in the wake of his May 8 announcement that he is abandoning Barack Obama’s 2015 nuclear deal with Iran.
The key line in his speech was, inarguably, “As President Trump said two weeks ago, he is ready, willing and able to negotiate a new deal [with Iran]. But the deal is not the objective. Our goal is to protect the American people.”
The basic insight that there is no intrinsic value to any agreement – or foreign policy initiative of any sort – that does not advance the interests of the United States or protect the American people is striking, because it has been absent from American foreign policy in relation to rogue regimes and entities for better part of the last generation.
In 1994, when then president Bill Clinton sought to contend with North Korea’s illicit nuclear program, the first fantasist president, Jimmy Carter, turned up in Pyongyang to see if there was a deal to be had.
Why are the Palestinians doing this? This is a bullying tactic to scare the US administration into supporting their cause and abandoning its “bias” in favor of Israel. This is a new/old tactic that the Palestinian leadership has long used to extract political support and financial aid from the world. It is like saying: Give me everything I want or I will exact revenge.
The Palestinians consider the present US administration one of the most hostile American governments in history towards the Palestinians. They are hoping that the bullying, threats and violent attacks on US citizens and officials will make the White House backtrack on its support for Israel and start appeasing them.
Ultimately, it is all about money. The Palestinian Authority is desperate for US financial aid; without it, the Palestinian leadership would not be able to survive. So the Palestinians are hoping to extort protection money from the Americans. It is like saying, “You see what will happen to you if you stop funding me? It could always get worse for you. I suggest that you restore my accountability-free funding, and perhaps I will see to it that you do not get hurt.”
The Americans should call the Palestinian bluff and send a warning to the Palestinian leadership that there will be consequences for their rhetoric and actions if they do not cease the incitement and brainwashing. The US should use the money as leverage to demand this from the Palestinians. The Palestinian Authority needs your money and you have the right to demand something good in return for it. There is no reason why any American should be funding the same Palestinian propaganda machine that is inciting not only against Israel, but also against the US and its citizens.
While the army of Israel succeeded in fending off repeated infiltration attempts from the Gaza border during mass protests and clashes over the past seven weeks, the State of Israel lost the fight for public opinion — resoundingly, according to some.
“There’s a war being waged, and we’re not even on the battlefield,” Deputy Minister for Public Diplomacy Michael Oren told The Times of Israel.
The story accepted by much of the world appears to be one of largely peaceful Palestinian protests met by overwhelming, disproportionate lethal force by the powerful Israel Defense Forces, said Oren. This beat out the Israeli narrative that says this was a military campaign by the Hamas terrorist group, which regularly calls for the destruction of the Jewish state, using human shields as a cover for its attacks along the fence with the intention of getting as many of its own civilians shot by Israeli troops as possible, he said.
Universal sympathy for Israel was never likely.
Israeli officials repeated that Hamas was trying to get mobs of Gazans through the fence, including its own gunmen, potentially to carry out attacks inside Israel, and that the IDF’s prime obligation was to ensure this did not happen. But precisely because it didn’t happen, this was a mere claim on Israel’s part — and it was set against actual pictures of dead and injured Gazans.
Teachers work hard to find real-life examples to help pique the interests of their skeptical students. Teachers in UNRWA schools face the same challenge. But to teach science to Palestinian students in Gaza, the West Bank, and parts of East Jerusalem, these teachers rely on textbooks that promote a program of incitement and violence against Jews.
A seventh-grade science textbook has an illustration of a boy with his head wrapped in a kiffeya, aiming a sling shot at Israeli soldiers.
The text reads: During the first Palestinian uprising, Palestinian youths used slingshots to confront the soldiers of the Zionist Occupation and defend themselves from their treacherous bullets. What is the relationship between the elongation of the slingshot’s rubber and the tensile strength affecting it? What are the forces that influence the stone after its release from the slingshot?
The consequences of these teachings — and more like them throughout the curriculum — were tragically revealed in the horrific events at the Gaza border this week.
First, the lessons violate UNESCO’s standards of peace and tolerance and respect of “the other.” The drawing of the soldiers as children — smaller than the stone thrower, as if they were harmless — falsely encourages young children to face a deadly enemy without fear. The subliminal message is that the stone thrower has a fighting chance against the armed soldier.
Manelis states that IDF soldiers “acted with courage and restraint, following strict rules of engagement to ensure minimum civilian injury and loss of life while still protecting the border.” The optics did not favour Israel, naturally, because the truth can’t make much headway when an enemy is prepared to put its own women and children in harm’s way, calculatedly using their bodies for propaganda purposes.
The IDF policy was indeed to warn first and shoot as a defensive action. Their first priority was, quite rightly, self-defence and defence of Israeli civilians. And as Manelis writes, “The soldiers of the IDF won this week by keeping Israeli families safe and by stopping Hamas from accomplishing its stated goals.”
But yeah, Hamas is winning the propaganda war, and the proof is that even a seasoned and objective journalist like Terry Glavin is so frustrated with the human cost of this reckless, feckless and essentially futile act of jihad, that he’s essentially asking Israel to find a way to stop it, as if there were some magical, casualty-free solution the IDF could employ, if only it chose to, in defending a border against a rabid mass of suicide-prone enemies.
Israel is constantly subjected to double standards — by the UN, by biased journalists, by anti-Semites on social media. In choosing to use this morally charged locution, “abomination,” with regard to the IDF, even the brilliant and knowledgeable and honourable Terry Glavin, whose writing on foreign affairs I greatly admire, has not only succumbed to uncharacteristic rhetorical carelessness, but in doing so, has given comfort and ammunition to polemical jackals for whom he normally and justifiably feels the greatest contempt.
As Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu masters the US embassy relocation, the Iranian threat, the Syrian chaos, the Gaza border invaders, the Russian-Vladimir Putin Rubik’s cube, the Donald Trump tsunami, and his new fragile alliance with Egypt and Saudi Arabia, amid the usual media lies, I confess, I’m glad Netanyahu’s in charge. I’m not happy enough to regret my previous calls that he resign. Had he retired gracefully – with a full pardon for himself and his wife – this summer, with his security credibility intact, Israel wouldn’t have a leader in this wobbly world reeking of ethical sloppiness.
Had he retired then, Israel would have a new leader building a reputation by now – and maybe relying on a still-credible Netanyahu for security advice. But I’m happy enough with Netanyahu’s careful statesmanship to betray the Bibi bashers – and today’s all-or-nothing partisans – by cheering what’s cheer-worthy.
The greatest threat Israel faces is the Iranian-Syrian-Hezbollah menace. Netanyahu’s policy has been clear: you draw red lines and follow through on threats – unlike Barack Obama bowing to chemical weapons in Syria. Iran is scary. Yet since the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s, the regime has had zero capacity for casualties.
With its economy weak, demonstrations spreading, and US pressure growing – finally! – this dictatorship will continue to try extending its influence by sacrificing other pawns – Lebanese, Syrians, Palestinians, Israelis.
What it comes down to is that principles such as the protection and the sanctity of borders, the right to self defense and use of military force to defend one’s country, that are a matter of fact anywhere else, are rights that Israel is denied.
This is a travesty when accompanied by journalists who openly support one side in the conflict and claim objectivity. A Reuters event in Jerusalem features a known Arab terrorist in a comic role; BBC reporter weeps on air for terrorist leader – these are but two examples of the conduct of the foreign media covering the Arab-Israeli conflict.
For years the media failed to accurately cover Arab terror while romanticizing the “Palestinian” narrative. Many of them fraternized with terrorists and willingly complied with censorship demands by Islamic extremists, and in so doing contribute to advancing the cause of extremists around the world. Feeding the phenomena of “Fake” news.
Until the emergence of social media, the public had no alternatives for getting information outside of the media. The public drew all the knowledge about the world from journalists. This gave journalists an almost religious standing, similar to the clergy of the Catholic Church of the past. Very much like the Church, the media chose to abuse their power. They broadcast whatever they liked according to their political beliefs.
The false idols are being smashed and the public are getting the truth from other sources. Much like the Reformation, we are today witnessing a rebellion against what were once considered trusted sources yet are now abusing that trust.
South Africa’s withdrawal of its ambassador to Israel, Sisa Ngombane, hands a momentary victory to Hamas in its war of deception and terror. Hamas, the Islamic government and terror group, rules the Gaza Strip with an iron fist without regard for human or civil rights — including the persecution, torture and killing of Palestinian Christians.
While the South African government likely views the Gazan side as the weaker and therefore “just” party regardless of terror actions or declarations of jihad against the Jews, Hamas’ terror crusade has sent young Gazans to their deaths by inciting and compensating them thousands of dollars to penetrate the Gaza-Israel border fence in to kill innocent Israeli citizens, including children, to “retake Palestine” from the Jews.
South Africa must understand that its diplomatic break from Israel merely strengthens the Islamic Republic of Iran’s hidden hand guiding Hamas’ Gaza jihad and weakens the cause of peace, justice and self-determination for Palestinians and Israelis.
Hamas has long proved its terror bona fides in line with its 1987 covenant expressing its religious duty to destroy the Jewish people and its nation state. Since 1993, Hamas has killed hundreds of Israeli civilians in mass-casualty suicide attacks throughout Israel. Hamas’ current terror crusade in Gaza has been engineered by Muslim Brotherhood groups in Europe and by Yahiya Sinwar, Hamas’ new president, who has been a commander in the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam, Hamas’s military wing.
Sinwar is widely considered Hamas’ most ruthless leader since the organisation’s founding in 1987.
Seth Frantzman: Gaza Strip: A look back at how we got here
In 1998, US president Bill Clinton flew into Gaza International Airport with six helicopters. Palestinian and American flags fluttered.
Yasser Arafat met Clinton, and they enjoyed ceremonies, meetings, speeches, a meal of lamb and three kinds of fish, according to reports at the time. Palestinians said they felt Clinton’s visit was a recognition of their demands for statehood. Twenty years later, the Gaza airport is in ruins, its runways and terminal, whose opening Clinton had overseen, are bulldozed and destroyed.
It’s been 20 years since Gaza had high hopes of being something other than the Hamas-run isolated tragedy it has become.
With the eight weeks of the “Great Return March” from March to May, the Palestinians in Gaza sought to put themselves back on the map of world attention. They may try again on the anniversary of the Six Day War, “Naksa Day,” to stage more protests. It’s still unclear if Hamas or the tens of thousands who turned out for the rallies, and the thousands who were wounded by live fire during the protests, succeeded in changing anything in Gaza. It’s worth pausing to consider how we got here.
The population of the Gaza Strip has increased from around 100,000 in 1947 to 500,000 in 1967 and 1.9 million today.
The Palestinian Authority foreign minister said Tuesday that he had asked the International Criminal Court to open an “immediate investigation” into alleged Israeli crimes against the Palestinians. Israel rejected the request as “cynical” and “absurd.”
Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki said he submitted the “referral” to the court during a meeting with the ICC’s chief prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, in The Hague on Tuesday.
Malki said the complaint seeks an investigation into Israeli policies in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem since the Palestinians joined the ICC in June 2014.
He said that included Israeli settlement policies as well as recent violence in the Gaza Strip. Since March 30, tens of thousands of Palestinians have taken part in weekly “March of Return” protests, which Israel says are orchestrated by the ruling Hamas terror group and used as cover for attempted attacks and breaches of the border fence.
Malki called the request an important “test” of accountability for the ICC.
The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court signaled that she will not be rushed into making a decision on whether to launch an investigation into alleged “crimes” by Israel against the Palestinians.
In a statement issued after Palestinian Authority Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki called for an immediate investigation, Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda on Tuesday noted that she has been conducting a preliminary probe since January 2015 to establish whether she should open a full-blown investigation.
She said the “preliminary examination has seen important progress and will continue to follow its normal course” guided by provisions in the court’s founding treaty, the Rome Statute.
Bensouda said she must consider “issues of jurisdiction, admissibility, and the interests of justice” in deciding whether to open an investigation.
The White House is considering action against Palestinian diplomats in Washington after Ramallah asked the International Criminal Court on Tuesday to investigate alleged Israeli crimes, The Times of Israel has learned.
According to a US law passed in December 2015, the Palestinian Authority is subject to penalties if it pursues the prosecution of Israelis at the Hague-based ICC. One of those ramifications includes the closing of their diplomatic mission to the United States, run by the Palestine Liberation Organization.
“We are reviewing this latest development to determine if it requires changes to the operating status of the PLO office in Washington, D.C., which has been limited to activities related to achieving a lasting, comprehensive peace between the Israelis and Palestinians since November 2017,” a National Security Council spokesperson said.
Last November, then US secretary of state Rex Tillerson refused to certify that the Palestinians were complying with that Congressional mandate, initiating intense speculation over whether the Palestinian facility in the capital’s Georgetown neighborhood would close.
The measure gives the sitting US president 90 days to consider whether the Palestinians are engaging in “direct and meaningful negotiations with Israel.”
If US President Donald Trump determines they are, the Palestinians can keep the office. If not, he has the right to shutter it.
The State of Israel takes a severe view in relation to the purported Palestinian referral to the International Criminal Court (ICC), which is a cynical step without legal validity. The Palestinians continue to exploit the Court for political purposes, rather than work towards resuming the peace process with Israel.
It is absurd that the Palestinian actions vis-à-vis the Court come at a time when the Palestinians continue to incite to acts of terrorism, while exploiting women and children as human shields for violent attacks against the security of Israel’s citizens.
The purported Palestinian referral is legally invalid, and the ICC lacks jurisdiction over the Israeli-Palestinian issue, since Israel is not a member of the Court and because the Palestinian Authority is not a state.
Israel expects the ICC and its Prosecutor not to yield to Palestinian pressure, and stand firm against continued Palestinian efforts to politicize the Court and to derail it from its mandate.
Israel acts in accordance with independent and thorough judicial review mechanisms, befitting a democratic state, and in accordance with international law.
QUESTION: The Palestinians today took the – took their brief or complaints against Israel to the International Criminal Court. And I am wondering: one, what you make of that move by the Palestinians; and secondly, if this is going to have any impact on the way the administration now approaches the Palestinians either legally or any other way.
MS NAUERT: Well, we have long believed that these types of actions are not conducive to peace. We are not a party to the International Criminal Court, as many of you know. We oppose the actions taking place against Israel at the International Criminal Court because we see that simply as counterproductive.
We have spoken about this many times before. Our position on this matter is well known. We oppose actions against Israel as – at the International Criminal – Criminal Court – pardon me – because it doesn’t help the cause for peace. And that is one of the priorities of this administration, getting the Israelis and Palestinians back to the table where they can have a good, concrete negotiation about the peace process going forward. And the ICC just doesn’t do that.
QUESTION: Okay. But the ICC was created – and I realize that the U.S. is not a member of it, but it was created to provide accountability. So is there anything that you think that Israel needs to be accountable for to the Palestinians?
MS NAUERT: Look, I’m not going to get into that question. I think we have long talked about the situation going on in Gaza. We’ve long talked about the misery that the people face in Gaza is because of Hamas. We have seen and have watched as the previous clashes between the Israelis and Palestinians and those of Gaza have taken place. We’ve continued to call on Hamas to take better care of its people; it’s not taking care of its people. And I don’t have really much beyond that to give you right now.
QUESTION: Just on the Gaza thing.
MS NAUERT: Yeah.
QUESTION: I want to ask you about Ambassador Friedman’s op-ed column. Is it the position of the administration, as it appears to be the position – the personal position of the ambassador, that the quote-unquote “liberal media” have blood on their hands for their coverage?
MS NAUERT: Matt, I can tell you I’m aware of the ambassador’s editorial. I don’t have anything to say about that. I could just refer you to Ambassador Friedman for any questions about that.
British parliamentarians attacked their government for its failure to support the launch of a UN Human Rights Council probe against Israel for the 102 Palestinians allegedly killed on the Gaza border in the last seven weeks.
“If you are an ally of the government you can get away with breaking international law with impunity and you can also be allowed to be your own judge and jury, too,” charged British shadow (opposition) foreign secretary Emily Thornberry of the Labour Party.
She made the comment during a heated debate in the House of Commons on Monday during which British Foreign Secretary Alistair Burt fielded questions from parliamentary supporters and opponents of Israel.
The UK was one of 14 UNHRC member states that abstained from the resolution.
Burt said the government wanted to see an independent investigation into the deaths that occurred over the last seven weeks during the “Great March of Return”.
But it did not believe that a biased inquiry focused solely on Israel and not on Hamas would shed enough light on the situation.
Israeli Air Force jets targeted underground terror infrastructure in the northern Gaza Strip early Wednesday morning, the IDF said. Two further targets belonging to Hamas naval forces in Gaza were also targeted.
Local residents said the strikes destroyed a boat moored in Gaza City, with no reports of casualties. They said the boat, which was set ablaze, was due to sail to meet a flotilla of boats hoping to reach Gaza.
The IDF did not provide further details regarding the nature of the underground infrastructure.
The army said the strikes came in response to an arson attack on an Israeli military position by a number of Palestinians who infiltrated into Israel from the Gaza Strip on Tuesday morning and ongoing attempts to harm Israel using drones and kites.
“The Hamas terror organization is accountable for all threats originating from the Gaza Strip, above and below ground, and will bear the consequences for its actions against Israeli civilians and Israeli sovereignty,” said the army.
Earlier on Tuesday, following the arson attack, IDF forces targeted a Hamas observation post in the southern Gaza Strip.
On Tuesday, 22 Palestinians and their relatives were transferred from the Gaza Strip for medical treatment in Jordan, according to the IDF spokesperson.
The transfer was facilitated by the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) at the request of Jordan’s King Abdullah.
Jordanian ambulances transferring 22 Gazans to Jordan to receive medical treatment. (IDF SPOKESPERSON’S UNIT)Jordanian ambulances transferring 22 Gazans to Jordan to receive medical treatment. (IDF SPOKESPERSON’S UNIT)
Three Jordanian ambulances who had entered the country via the Allenby Bridge crossing in the morning transferred the injured Palestinians through the Erez Crossing out of the Gaza Strip.
Last week, the IDF coordinated the transfer of eight truckloads of vital medical equipment through the Kerem Shalom crossing.
However, Hamas turned away two large truckloads of Israeli humanitarian aid intended to relieve medical shortages in the Gaza Strip, with hospitals struggling to treat Palestinians wounded in clashes on the Israel-Gaza border. Hamas has frequently refused Israeli aid in the past.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is behind the recent Hamas-orchestrated violent demonstrations—dubbed the “March of Return”—at the Israel-Gaza border, according to Israeli authorities. Yet many major U.S. news outlets have failed to report Tehran’s role.
Israel’s domestic intelligence agency, the Shin Bet, stated:
““From the information we have, it appears Hamas is encouraging and sending protesters to the border fence in order to carry out violent acts and damage security infrastructure. In addition, it was found that Iran is providing funding to Hamas in order for it to carry out these violent activities along the Gaza Strip’s border fence.”
As CAMERA has detailed (see, for example “Palestinian Nazi Flags and Hamas Talking Points,” JNS, April 26, 2018) Hamas and other U.S.-designated terrorist groups have been organizing the demonstrations, interspersing armed operatives among civilians being used as human shields. Most of those killed in the demonstrations by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have been linked to terror organizations.
Hamas is one of many terror groups funded by the Islamic Republic, which the U.S. State Department has listed as the leading state sponsor of terrorism. The group has long supported Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), and others participating in the “March of Return.” Like Hamas, Iran’s ruling theocrats have called for Israel’s destruction and genocide of the Jewish people.
The mask has been pulled off
Hamas is Iran
Iran is Hamas
The terror along the security fence is an Iranian mission pic.twitter.com/M3J38E7haB
— IDF (@IDFSpokesperson) May 22, 2018
Since March 31st, Hamas-led violent riots have been staged on the Gaza border. The terror group’s leaders have been clear that the intent of what’s termed the Great Return March – reportedly funded by Iran – was to have masses of Palestinians infiltrate the Israeli border to exact ‘revenge’ on Israelis and implement the so-called “right of return” for millions of Gazans. The political aims, also acknowledged by Hamas leaders, was to sacrifice Palestinian lives in order to bloody Israel’s image.
Naturally, Israel resolved to defend its border, as any sovereign nation would do, and protect its civilians from the potentially calamitous impact of a proscribed terrorist group breaching the border. Their strategy employed non-lethal means, such as warnings, rubber bullets and tear gas, and, as a last resort, live-fire. The admission by Hamas leaders that most of those killed in recent clashes were Hamas members suggests that the IDF’s use of live-fire was judicious, and certainly consistent with the rules of engagement that the armies of most democratic countries would use when confronted with a similar threat by an armed terror group.
However, the media, beginning with the first protests, decided on its own narrative, one completely at odds with the facts: Israeli troops open-firing on non-violent Palestinians “protesters”. So, stories almost exclusively focused on the body count and images of Palestinian suffering, whilst erasing from the equation the violent nature of the riots and the context of Hamas’s cynical decision to win the media war by sacrificing Palestinian lives.
PreOccupiedTerritory: Palestinian Already Interviewed 6 Times Since Killed By IDF (satire)
Near the Erez Border Crossing, May 23 – A man slain at the hand of an Israeli sniper during disturbances at the fence separating the territory from Israel has appeared multiple times on news networks since the incident last Monday to talk with foreign correspondents about the brutal manner in which he was cut down.
Nasser Ashraf, 22, has granted interviews to six media outlets in the nine days that have elapsed after he participated in a riot some distance from the border fence and was fatally shot, including CNN, the British Broadcasting Corporation, the Associated Press, and the New York Times. During each interview the man has offered a vivid depiction of the moments in which he was engaging in unprovocative, nonviolent assembly, then collapsed and had to be removed on a stretcher by others at the protest scene.
“It was barbaric, it was horrible,” he told Declan Walsh of the New York Times. “I was shot in the abdomen like three times and bled to death before anyone could help me. I could barely get off the stretcher after the cameras stopped pointing at it.” Walsh included Ashraf’s story in his coverage of the ongoing disturbances.
As Jerusalem basked in tight-knit ties with Washington, a senior European official was said on Tuesday to have recently warned Israel not to “disparage” the EU, adding that US President Donald Trump’s legacy could be scaled back just as quickly as that of his predecessor Barack Obama.
“Trump won’t be president forever,” Hadashot TV on Tuesday quoted the unnamed official as saying during a recent visit to Israel.
“Just like nobody imagined that the Obama legacy would be erased so quickly, it can happen to the other side,” the source added.
“You shouldn’t disparage Europe. Look at the numbers: We are still your biggest trade partners. You don’t understand that we are under immense public pressure against Israel,” the senior official added.
Israel and the EU have lately been at loggerheads over the IDF’s handling of mass protests and riots on the Gaza border, as well as over Trump’s decision to unilaterally withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal — as Prime Minister Benjamin had urged if it couldn’t be “fixed” — with Europe calling for the accord to remain in place. Israel has also hailed the US relocation of its embassy to Jerusalem last week, a move Europe has rejected.
France’s Prime Minister Edouard Philippe has canceled a scheduled trip to Israel next month, citing domestic obligations, his office said on Wednesday.
Philippe, who had also planned a trip to Ramallah in the West Bank, had been expected to visit Jerusalem on June 1 to open the France-Israel Season of Culture together with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Israel’s Foreign Ministry also confirmed the cancellation, saying it was due to “internal French reasons.”
The culture festival is due to last through November and to focus on the themes of innovation, creativity and youth.
Some 400 events across a wide range of disciplines — from the arts to education, economics and sciences — have been planned for 50 French towns and around 20 Israeli ones.
In Israel, the sponsors include the Prime Minister’s Office and a number of ministries, including the Ministry for Strategic Affairs which, under its current minister, Gilad Erdan — who is also public security minister — is focused on battling the worldwide Boycott, Divest, Sanctions campaign against Israel.
There are unfortunate parallels between the UN Human Rights Council and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.
Both have lofty ambitions, the former to promote human rights and expose abuses, the latter to represent Australian voices and deliver quality news. Both suffer from an intractable culture of bias that works against them fulfilling their charter.
So it was with yawning predictability that ABC’s premier Sunday political show, Insiders, went “straight to the politics” as host Barrie Cassidy said during a panel chat to deride Australia’s decision to vote against a UNHRC resolution to launch an inquiry into the deaths of almost 60 Palestinians in Gaza last week. In fact, the resolution went much, much further than that, but more on that later.
Cassidy kicked off discussion with this: “There are 47 organisations on this Human Rights Commission. Two opposed the inquiry — two of them. Who are they, Karen?”
“The United States and Australia were the only two countries, Barrie, to oppose this resolution in the HRC,” said Karen Middleton, from The Saturday Paper. “Australia’s campaigned to get on to the HRC for a couple of years, and it seems in order to vote no.”
Then it was the turn of Fairfax’s David Crowe: “If Theresa May’s government can abstain, surely that would be an option for Australia to abstain. Britain, Germany and Japan all abstaining, that’s certainly a legitimate option.”
“Absolutely. You wonder why we’re on the council,” added Middleton.
For bias and shallow analysis, it’s hard to go past three people all miffed that Australia voted no to a resolution from a UNHRC with a core prejudice against Israel. Gerard Henderson was the token conservative.
Notice the constant outnumbering of any conservative voice on the ABC? This makes a mockery of its charter that the ABC should reflect the diversity of Australian voices. Instead, our ABC keeps breaking its end of the $1 billion deal it gets from taxpayers to abide by its charter.
Given that Insiders didn’t provide informed and fair analysis of the UNHRC and the resolution last Friday, let’s do it here.
Sharri Markson on the latest ABC bias in discussing Israel – letting a Muslim academic rant for minutes on end about Israel’s evil, and then cut off Greg Sheridan when he tried to put the other side.
IsraellyCool: Rowan Dean Rips Bob Carr for Legitimizing Terrorism
Fresh from agreeing to headline an event in support of the so-called palestinian “Right of Return” along with an outright terror supporter (before withdrawing after I exposed it), former Australian Foreign Minister Bob Carr has disgraced himself again, this time condemning Israel for protecting herself.
Thankfully, Bob Carr does not represent all Australians. There are also those like Rowan Dean, who appeared on The Bolt Report to inject some truth in to the debate, as well as rip Carr for legitimizing terrorism.
We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.