Posts

Israel News for January 12, 2017

Hamas Hacking
It was recently discovered that Hamas managed to hack the personal phones of dozens of IDF soldiers by using fake profiles of attractive Israeli women to initiate virtual relationships with them. Then the “girls” would ask the soldiers to download a specific video chat app. The app, which was a hacking tool, gave Hamas total control over the phone and allowed them to activate the camera and microphone, access contacts, videos and photos, and even Whatsapp conversations and emails—all without the soldier being aware. Hamas also managed to delete the application from the devices, while simultaneously installing more sophisticated monitoring and control applications without leaving a trace.

The investigation into the hacking by the IDF’s Information Security Department and the Shin Bet has revealed that there was minimal damage as almost all of the photos and information stolen was of a personal nature. The IDF is working on procedures to protect soldiers from falling prey to Hamas ruses on social media and to prevent Hamas from infiltrating the close to 3,000 IDF related Facebook groups. Quite a challenge.

While most of the soldiers only received a warning from their commanders, some may be put in military prison for 28 days.

For further reading click here.

Tillerson on Israel
In the course of his Senate confirmation hearing, Rex Tillerson, President-elect Trump’s choice for Secretary of State revealed his views on issues relating to Israel.

Tillerson criticized the recent UN Security Council resolution as being a way of coercing Israel to change its policies. He said, “Israel is, has always been and remains our most important ally in the region. The UN resolution that was passed, in my view, is not helpful. It actually undermines a good set of conditions for talks to continue.” He added, “That will not lead to a solution.”

Tillerson also criticized John Kerry, saying that he found the Secretary of States decision to make a speech devoted to the Middle East conflict in which he focused heavily on Israeli settlement building as “quite troubling”.

He called on the Palestinian leadership to condemn and prevent terror attacks, saying that that was a prerequisite for “any productive discussion around settlements.” He questioned whether Israel could feasibly negotiate with a Palestinian Authority that refuses to recognize its right to exist as a Jewish state.

For further reading click here.

Israel News for December 29, 2016

Kerry Speaks
US Secretary of State John Kerry gave the Israeli government a thorough beating as part of his speech to lay out US parameters for a two-state solution. He castigated the government, which he categorized as the most extreme ever, for thwarting peace by attempting to impose a one state solution through an aggressive and illegal settlement policy.

Kerry set the tone for his address at the outset by saying, “Some seem to believe that the U.S. friendship means the U.S. must accept any policy, regardless of our own interests, our own positions, our own words, our own principles — even after urging again and again that the policy must change. Friends need to tell each other the hard truths, and friendships require mutual respect.”

He went on to give a lengthy description of the Israeli Palestinian crisis in which he equated Palestinian and Hamas terror with Israeli settlements as being obstacles to peace. He claimed that US policy has consistently considered settlement building in “occupied territories” to be illegal and that the Republican administrations of Reagan and Bush (the first) both allowed UN Security Council resolutions similar to the recent one to pass.

Kerry said that based on its policy and values, the US could not in good conscious veto the resolution. He also reiterated that the Obama administration has done more for Israel than any other administration (yup, he said that).

Kerry then laid out the Obama administration’s parameters for a two state solution, non of which are new.

1. A “secure and recognized border between Israel and a viable and contiguous Palestine,” based on Israel withdrawing from territory captured in 1967, along with land swaps to “reflect practical realities on the ground.”

2. Creation of a Palestinian state.

3. A “fair and realistic solution to the Palestinian refugee issue,” which would include compensation and resettlement. Kerry implied that the international community would fund the compensation, but he wasn’t clear as to where the refugees would be resettled. He did not make reference to a “right of return”, which would allow refugees to settle in Israel. [No mention was made of compensation for the hundreds of thousands of Jews forced to leave Arab countries after 1948.]

4. Jerusalem to be capital for both states.

5. An agreement to satisfy Israel’s security needs while ending its military occupation of Palestinian territories.

Finally, Kerry said that both sides must end the conflict and all outstanding claims, enabling all normal relations, “To bring closure to this conflict, so that everyone can move ahead to a peaceful future.”

To watch Kerry’s entire speech click here.

Commentary
Let’s assume that Kerry is right about Israeli settlement policy eroding the possibility of a two state solution and that vetoing the UN security council resolution would have gone against American policy and beliefs. Given that the current administration has less than a month remaining, couldn’t the US have just postponed the vote until after January 20th and avoid having to veto or abstain?

Whether or not the US was involved in creating and pushing forward the resolution (as Israel claims), there is no doubt that if the US requested a postponement, it would have sent a clear signal to the council not to force the vote and it would have most likely been postponed.

Clearly the Obama administration wanted to use the venue of the Security Council to make its point and take a final swipe at the Netanyahu government. But what purpose did it serve, just weeks before a new president will take office? Why did Obama wait until his final days to make the statement he’s been wanting to make for eight years? Judging by the strong bipartisan reaction to the move, its clear that he would not have been able to survive as president had he done so during his substantive time in office.

As Kerry clearly stated in his speech, there are already similar resolutions “on the books” against settlements, and this latest one will most likely not change anything in practice. So the only thing gained was an opportunity for Obama to take his parting shot at Israel and stain his legacy in the minds of many Americans.

Response to Kerry
PM Netanyahu lashed out at Kerry’s speech, calling it biased against Israel and blaming Kerry for blaming the failure of the peace process primarily on Israel. The PM said, “Israel does not need to be lectured about peace by foreign leaders.”

Netanyahu also said, “The entire Middle East is going up in flames, entire countries are toppling, terrorism is raging and for an entire hour the secretary of state attacks the only democracy in the Middle East. Maybe Kerry did not notice that Israel is the only place in the Middle East where Christmas can be celebrated in peace and security. Sadly, none of this interests the secretary of state.”

PA President Mahmoud Abbas responded to Mr. Kerry’s speech by calling on Israel to freeze housing construction in order to restart negotiations. He said, “The minute the Israeli government agrees to cease all settlement activities, including in and around occupied East Jerusalem, and agree to implement the signed agreements on the basis of mutual reciprocity, the Palestinian leadership stands ready to resume permanent status negotiations.”

Republican and Democratic members of Congress criticized Kerry’s speech and displayed strong bipartisan support for Israel.

Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona said, “Secretary Kerry’s speech today was at best a pointless tirade in the waning days of an outgoing administration. At worst, it was another dangerous outburst that will further Israel’s diplomatic isolation and embolden its enemies.”

Democratic Representative Eliot L. Engel of New York, the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, called Mr. Kerry’s speech “gratuitous” and “wrong” and said, “There doesn’t seem any purpose to this other than to embarrass Israel. It just pained me to watch it.”

Germany, France and Great Britain all praised the speech. What a surprise.

Reaction from the Arab world can be summed up by a statement from Abdulkhaleq Abdulla, a professor of political science in the United Arab Emirates, who said, “At the last five minutes of the hour, apparently Kerry and Obama are showing some courage to stand up to Israel, but it is coming too late in the game. It is after the fact. They should have shown this amount of political courage four years ago, if not eight years ago.”

To watch PM Netanyahu’s full response to the Kerry speech click here.

Oh No
In a much more disturbing development, Gap stores will be closing in Israel. Apparently, the prices were just a bit too high for Israeli tastes. No, the closings have nothing to do with Obama, the UN resolution or John Kerry’s speech.

For further reading click here.

Video Clip
To watch PM Netanyahu giving a Hanukkah lesson to the young children of employees of the Prime Minister’s Office click here.