Geskiedenis Podcasts

21/08/2017 The Israeli Response - History

21/08/2017 The Israeli Response - History

Dit lyk asof die Israeliese regering 'n probleem het-sy goed opgeleide, hiper-sensitiewe antenna kan altyd antisemitisme opspoor. Die kontroversie wat ontstaan ​​het as gevolg van Netanyahu se besoek aan Hongarye verbleek egter in vergelyking met die geskille wat veroorsaak is deur die oorverdowende stilte van die premier na die onlangse aanval in Charlottesville, VA.

Netanyahu bly stil, ondanks die vlag van die Nazi-vlae en die geskree van blatante antisemitiese gesange van die betogers in Charlottesville. Net na president Donald Trump se tweede persverklaring oor die onderwerp waarin hy die neo-nazi's veroordeel het-het Netanyahu die volgende getwiet uit die amptelike rekening van die premier (en nie uit sy persoonlike rekening nie): 'Woedend oor uitdrukkings van antisemitisme, neo-nazisme en rassisme. Almal moet hierdie haat teenstaan. ”

Nadat president Trump die volgende dag teruggekeer het en weereens sy kant die skuld gegee het vir die geweld in sy impromptu perskonferensie, het premier Netanyahu heeltemal stilgebly. Lede van Netanyahu se Likud-party het ook nie kritiek gelewer op president Trump se uitsprake nie (met die uitsondering van die minister van wetenskap, tegnologie en ruimtevaart, Ofir Akunis, wat 'n negatiewe opmerking oor neo-Nazi's gelewer het). Die openbare verklaring was eintlik die teenoorgestelde, minister van kommunikasie, Ayoub Kara, beskou as 'n Netanyahu -vertroueling: "Weens die geweldige betrekkinge met die VSA moet ons die verklarings oor die Nazi's in die regte verhouding plaas," Kara vervolg:

'Ons moet antisemitisme en enige spoor van Nazisme veroordeel, en ek sal as minister doen wat ek kan om die verspreiding daarvan te stop. Maar Trump is die beste Amerikaanse leier wat Israel nog ooit gehad het. Sy betrekkinge met die premier van Israel is wonderlik, en nadat hy die verskriklike jare van Obama verduur het, is Trump die onbetwiste leier van die vrye wêreld, en ons moet niemand aanvaar wat hom benadeel nie. ”

Die 26-jarige seun van die premier, Yair Netanyahu, het op sy persoonlike Facebook-blad geskryf:

'Om dinge in perspektief te plaas. Ek is 'n Jood, ek is 'n Israelier, die neo-Nazi-vuilgoed in Virginia haat my en my land. Maar hulle behoort aan die verlede. Hulle ras is besig om uit te sterf. Die boewe van Antifa en BLM wat my land haat (en ook Amerika volgens my) word egter net sterker en sterker en word super dominant in Amerikaanse universiteite en openbare lewe. ”

Terwyl lede van die Likoed het die lyn gesleep wat premier Netanyahu neergelê het, nie alle lede van die koalisie het die voorbeeld gevolg nie. Naftali Bennett, hoof van die godsdienstige HaBayit Hayehudi party het op sy twitter geskryf: 'Nazi -vlae in die VSA. Amerikaanse leierskap moet onomwonde veroordeel. ”

President Reuven "Ruvy" Rivlin het president Trump nie uitdruklik gekritiseer nie, maar het 'n brief aan Malcolm Hoenlein, uitvoerende vise -president van die presidentskonferensie van groot Joodse organisasies, geskryf:

"Die idee dat ons in ons tyd 'n Nazi -vlag sou sien - miskien die kwaadwilligste simbool van antisemitisme - in die strate van die grootste demokrasie ter wêreld en die mees gekoesterde en grootste bondgenoot van Israel, is amper onwaarskynlik."

Israeliese politici van die opposisie was baie meer uitgesproke. Yair Lapid, hoof van die Yesh Atid party en die seun van 'n oorlewende van die Holocaust het die volgende veroordeling op sy Facebook -blad geskryf:

'Daar is nie twee kante nie. As Neo-Nazi's in Charlottesville optrek en slagspreuke teen Jode skree en ter ondersteuning van blanke oppergesag, moet die veroordeling ondubbelsinnig wees. Hulle verteenwoordig haat en boosheid. Elkeen wat in die menslike gees glo, moet sonder vrees daarteen staan. ”

Ander opposisieleiers het hulle ook onomwonde uitgespreek. Die voormalige minister van buitelandse sake, Tzipi Livni, het 'n uitgebreide artikel geskryf waarin die neo-nazi's op hierdie webwerf gekritiseer is: I was appalled to see Amerikaners swing Swastikas.

Daar moet op gelet word dat die grootste deel van die Israeliese publiek onaangeraak lyk deur die verskillende verklarings van president Trump. 'N Onlangse opname onder Israeli's toon volgehoue ​​vertroue in president Trump. Dit kan natuurlik deels te wyte wees aan die feit dat Israel se mees geleesde dagblad die verhale op Charlottesville begrawe het. President Trump se verklaring, sy perskonferensie en sy omkering is almal op bladsy 26. gedruk. Daarteenoor het die ander koerante gelei met die verhaal van Charlottesville en Trump se reaksies op bladsy een. Dit kan net toevallig wees dat daardie koerant, Yisrael Hayom, word besit deur Sheldon Adelson, een van Trump se voorste ondersteuners.

Eerste minister Netanyahu blyk een van die min wêreldleiers te wees wat nie bereid is om president Trump se reaksie op gebeure in Charlottesville te kritiseer nie. Dit is skokkend om te sien hoe 'n leier wat die geheue van die Holocaust gebruik het om alle vorme van kritiek op Israel te delegitimeer, stom bly as die Amerikaanse president dit onomwonde stel terwyl hy duidelike en steeds teenwoordige antisemitisme aan die kaak stel.

Die vraag is ... hoekom? Waarom het Netanyahu hom daarvan weerhou om Trump se uitsprake te kritiseer? Aangesien ons moontlik nooit die regte antwoord weet nie, word spekulasie oorbly. Een moontlikheid is dat Netanyahu, met inagneming van die kwikpersoonlikheid van die huidige Amerikaanse president, werklik bang is vir wat 'n woedende Trump kan doen.

Tweedens, dit is baie moeilik om te erken dat dit verkeerd is. Netanyahu en die Israeliese regses was vrolik toe Trump die verkiesing wen. Dit is nou moeilik om toe te gee dat hulle verkeerd was en dat Trump moontlik nie die beste Amerikaanse president vir Israel is nie.

Derdens het 'n vorm van blindheid binne die Israeliese reg ontwikkel. Hulle het 'n paar foute begaan wat op mekaar voed. Die regter glo dat enige kritiek op Israel antisemities is. In die beoordeling van die regses, as 'n linkse individu die besetting van die Wesbank of ander Israeliese aktiwiteite kritiseer, dring hulle daarop aan dat die kritici antisemities moet wees.

MJ Rosenberg het onlangs geskryf "Anti-Sionisme is antisemitisme". Soos Rosenberg verduidelik, is nie alle kritiek op Israel antisemities nie. Die omgekeerde van die stelling is ook onwaar - dit wil sê, as u Israel ondersteun, kan u nie antisemities wees nie. Hierdie idee staan ​​agter die onvermoë van regse Israeliërs om te verstaan ​​dat regse politici wêreldwyd-hetsy in Hongarye of die Verenigde State-eintlik antisemities kan wees, al ondersteun hulle Israel. Vreemd genoeg is dit juis die politici wat antisemitisme uitroep, veral diegene aan die linkerkant, wat skynbaar die tradisionele antisemiete se oë toemaak.

Die gevaar dat die premier en die naaste aan hom nie reageer op die optrede nie, of die gebrek daaraan deur Trump, sal nie 'n "oorwinning" vir die Nazi's wees nie. Netanyahu en sy regerende party se nalatigheid om te praat, kan egter 'n verdere breuk tussen Israel en die Amerikaanse Jood veroorsaak het. Hier in Israel was daar geen gevoel van die stryd wat baie in die Amerikaanse Joodse gemeenskap gedurende die afgelope weke gevoel het nie; daar is geen identifisering of poging om 'n gemeenskap in die moeilikheid te help nie.

Die gevaar wat die sit langs die kantlyn is, is gevaarliker vir die veiligheid van Israel in die toekoms. Trump -ondersteuners is 'n minderheid Amerikaners. Eendag, hetsy vroeër of later, sal die Trump -administrasie tot 'n einde kom. As die tyd aanbreek, sal die meeste Amerikaners nog steeds 'n Israel sien wat sy waardes deel? Of beskou Israel as een van die min lande ter wêreld wat Trump tot die bitter einde ondersteun.


11 September Aanvalle

Op 11 September 2001 het 19 militante verbonde aan die Islamitiese ekstremistiese groep al -Qaeda vier vliegtuie gekaap en selfmoordaanvalle teen teikens in die Verenigde State uitgevoer. Twee van die vliegtuie is in die tweeling torings van die World Trade Center in New York gevlieg, 'n derde vliegtuig het die Pentagon net buite Washington, DC getref, en die vierde vliegtuig het in 'n veld in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, neergestort. Byna 3 000 mense is dood tydens die 9/11 -terreuraanvalle, wat groot Amerikaanse inisiatiewe veroorsaak het om terrorisme te bekamp en die presidentskap van George W. Bush gedefinieer het.


Bill Maher verdedig Israel, skeur 'liberale media' en 'Bella Hadids of the world'

Die gasheer Bill Maher, Real Time, het Vrydagaand gewag op die konflik tussen Israel en Gaza nadat hy verlede week se vertoning gekanselleer het na sy positiewe uitslag van die koronavirustoets.

Hy het vinnig 'n kwessie met die 'quotliberale media' gemaak oor die dekking van die gevegte.

'Een van die frustrasies wat ek gehad het terwyl ek weg was, is dat ek die oorlog in Israel aanskou het ... en dit was vir my frustrerend, want daar was niemand op liberale media om Israel te verdedig nie,' het Maher die paneelbespreking begin.

Ons het hierdie land geword noudat ons soortgelyk aan hierdie saak is. En ek wil ook graag van die kolf af sê ek dink nie kinders verstaan ​​nie-en as ek kinders bedoel, bedoel ek die jonger geslagte-kan u nie geskiedenis op Instagram leer nie, 'het die 65-jarige Maher bygevoeg. & quot; Daar is net nie genoeg ruimte nie. & quot

Die gasheer het bots met die rubriekskrywer van die New York Times, Nicholas Kristof, wat voorgestel het dat Israel moontlike oorlogsmisdade teen Gaza gepleeg het.

& quot Wel, Gaza het 4 000 vuurpyle op Israel afgevuur. Wat sou jy sê moes Israel gedoen het in plaas van wat hulle gedoen het? & Quot, het Maher gevra.

Ek bedoel, internasionale prokureurs is redelik duidelik dat hulle die reg het om hulself te verdedig ... maar daar is 'n gevoel dat hul reaksie waarskynlik 'n oorlogsmisdaad was omdat hulle nie burgerlike ongevalle voldoende vermy het nie, 'het Kristof geantwoord.

'Maar hulle het die vuurpyle doelbewus op burgerlike plekke gesit,' het Maher teruggeskiet. "Dit is hul strategie."

Die HBO -ster het teruggedraai na die liberale vertelling dat Israel die land gesteel het - met terme soos 'besetters' en 'apartheid' wat rondgegooi word.

Die Jode was sedert ongeveer 1200 v.C. in daardie gebied van die wêreld, lank voordat die eerste Moslem of Arabier op die aarde geloop het. . Ek bedoel, Jerusalem was hul hoofstad. As dit dus die eerste is wat daar kom, is dit nie eers naby nie, 'het Maher gesê. Die Jode was almal wat deur die Romeine beset was, en dan die Perse en die Bisantyne en dan die Ottomane. So ja, daar was kolonisasie aan die gang. In die 19de eeu begin hulle terugkeer na Palestina, wat nooit 'n Arabiese land was nie. Daar was nooit 'n land met die naam Palestina wat 'n aparte Arabiese land was nie. & Quot

Maher trek toe twee kaarte op waarin die Verenigde Nasies se voorgestelde Israelies-Palestynse gebiede vergelyk word, en wys daarop dat die Arabiere die goeie deel van die land sou gehad het, teenoor die kontemporêre grense van Israel.

& quot; Moet dit nie die mense wat die halwe brood verwerp het, aangaan nie en bly aanval ... Hamas se handves sê dat hulle Israel net wil uitwis. Hulle onderhandelingsposisie is: "Julle sterf almal," het Maher gesê. Die tweestaat-oplossing was 'n paar keer op die tafel. Daar kan nou 'n Arabiese hoofstad in Oos -Jerusalem wees as Yasser Arafat dit in 2003 aanvaar het. Hy het nie.

"Ek bedoel, hulle het dit verwerp en keer op keer oorlog toe gegaan," het hy voortgegaan, "en jy weet, wat Gaza betref, is dit vir my verstommend dat die progressiewe mense dink dat hulle progressief is deur dit te neem kant daarvan, die Bella Hadids van die wêreld, hierdie beïnvloeders. Ek wil net sê in Februarie vanjaar het 'n Hamas -hof beslis dat 'n ongetroude vrou nie in Gaza kan reis sonder die toestemming van 'n manlike voog nie. Regtig? Is dit waar die progressiewe mense is? Bella Hadid en haar vriende hardloop skreeuend na Tel Aviv as hulle een dag in Gaza moet woon. & Quot

Kristof het probeer om Hadid te verdedig en gesê dat hy nie sou insien dat die supermodel Hamas verdedig nie, maar eerder praat vir die 'kinders in Gaza' wat tydens die konflik vermoor is. Maher het teruggedruk en gewys op die gesang van Hadid: 'Van die rivier na die see sal Palestina vry wees', 'n slagspreuk wat lankal geïnterpreteer is as die uitskakeling van die Joodse staat.

Maher het voortgegaan met die idee dat Israel 'n sogenaamde 'apartheid' is, en dit is baie anders as die werklike apartheid van Suid-Afrika wat beheer is deur Brittanje en Holland wat geen aanspraak op die land kon hê nie.

& quot Die Israeliete, hulle het foute begaan, maar dit is 'n 'apartheid' -staat omdat hulle steeds aangeval word!' het Maher uitgeroep. As hulle dit nie styf hou nie, word hulle doodgemaak! Dit lyk na iets anders! & Quot


Hoe het die huidige konflik tussen Israel en Hamas begin en wat is daarna?

Tydens die begin van Ramadan word baie Jode aangerand omdat hulle uiterlik Joods was.

Palestyne se Jerusalemiete het hulself verfilm terwyl hulle Israeliese vlae skeur en Jode aanval wat terugkom uit gebede uit die Westelike Muur.

Die polisie het op die geweld gereageer deur Jode te verhinder om die Arabiese wyk binne te gaan en kontrolepunte op te stel om meer geweld te voorkom.

Sommige radikale Palestynse groepe het Israel daarvan beskuldig dat hulle teen die Arabiese bevolking in Jerusalem diskrimineer en die Arabiese jeug aangemoedig om oproerig te maak.

Die Israeliese polisie het uiteindelik die kontrolepunte in die ou stad verwyder om die geweld te onderdruk.

Radikale groepe het besluit om hul aandag op die Sheikh Jarah -omgewing te vestig en geweld teen Jode in die buurt aan te spoor.

In die Ottomaanse tydperk is bewys dat die hofsaak van die betrokke huis van Sheikh Jarah Joodse eiendom is.

Die Hooggeregshof van Israel was op soek na 'n uitsettingsdatum vir die huidige Arabiese huurders.

Die beslissing van die Hooggeregshof is vertraag weens die geweld in die buurt.

Aangesien Jerusalem -dag ('n Israeliese vakansiedag meestal gevier deur nasionale godsdienstige Jode wat die hereniging van Israel in 1967 gevier het) Maandag aan die begin van die week begin het, het beide Palestyne en Israeliese grenspolisie gedurende die dag bots.

Die polisie in Jerusalem verklaar dat Palestynse oproeriges klippe gooi en vuurwerke na die polisie skiet, en sodanige optrede het hulle later gedwing om die moskee te bestorm.

Hamas gebruik hierdie situasie as 'n verskoning om betrokke te raak en eis dat die Israeliese regering alle oproeriges in die gevangenis moet vrylaat, asook om alle Jode uit die sjeik Jarrah te verwyder, of om 18:00 sal hulle vuurpyle afskiet.

Hamas was getrou aan hul woord en het honderde vuurpyle na die middel van die land, Jerusalem, die burgerlike lughawe en die gebied naby Gaza afgevuur, wat Israeliese aanvalle tot gevolg gehad het.

Hamas wil meer chaos skep deur die vuur op Al Aqsa te gebruik as propaganda om Arabiese burgers van Israel aan te wakker.

”Lid van die politieke buro van Hamas en voormalige minister van binnelandse sake, Fathi Hammad, het die inwoners van Jerusalem aangemoedig om 'die koppe van die Jode af te sny'. Sy opmerkings is gemaak in 'n openbare toespraak wat op 7 Mei 2021 op Al-Aqsa TV (Hamas-Gaza) uitgesaai is. Hammad het getoon hoe hulle hul koppe van die slagaar moet afsny. Hy het bygevoeg dat 'n mes slegs vyf sikkels kos en sê: "met die vyf sikkels sal jy die Joodse staat verneder." Hammad het voortgegaan om te sê dat Jode korrupsie versprei het en met arrogansie opgetree het, en hulle dag of afrekening en oomblik van vernietiging het aangebreek. In September 2016 is Hammad deur die Amerikaanse ministerie van buitelandse sake aangewys as 'n terroris.

Die afvuur van vuurpyle uit die Gazastrook het 'n ongekende aantal vuurpyle bereik wat na Israel afgevuur is.

Sommige Israeliese Arabiere wat sê dat hulle optree ter verdediging van Al Aqsa, het enige Jood wat hulle in hul stad kon vind, aangeval.

Geweld in Lod teen Jode het tot so 'n vlak toegeneem dat sinagoges in Lod afgebrand is, Joodse huise, motors en besighede gevandaliseer is.

In reaksie op die situasie het baie van die Jode in Lod die polisie daarvan beskuldig dat hulle hulle nie beskerm het nie.

Gewapende Joodse vrywilligers het van die Wesbank en ander dele van Israel na Lod opgedaag om Joodse lewens te verdedig.

Drie Jode wat uit selfverdediging op 'n oproer geskiet het, is in hegtenis geneem en wag op vonnis van 'n distriksregter.

Jode uit periferiestede van Bat Yam en Tiberias wou wraak neem vir die dag tevore en besluit om die volgende dag uit te gaan om Arabiere te lynch.

In Bat Yam is een Israelitiese Palestyn ernstig beseer toe Joodse oproeriges hom op straat probeer vermoor het.

In Akko en Um Al Fahm het hulle probeer om 'n Joodse gesin te lynch wat met ernstige beserings weggekom het.

Israel het vuurpyle, terreurtonnels, hommeltuie en RPG -aanvalle uit Gaza beveg, terwyl hulle ook burgerlike onrus binne sy grense moes hanteer.

Intussen gebruik baie Israeliese Arabiere en linkses die oorlog as 'n manier om die premier die skuld te gee dat hy met die oorlog begin het.

Baie Jode en Arabiere regoor Israel het saamgekom in protes teen die onluste wat Jode en Arabiere weier om vyande te wees.

Die aanhitsing deur sosiale media en Arabiese Israeliërs wat tot onluste aangehits word, duur nog 'n week lank sonder ernstige tekens van ophou.

So, hoe gaan ons vorentoe?

Dit is duidelik dat die IDF nie kan ophou om Hamas aan te val nie, totdat hulle hul vermoë om Israel aan te val, vernietig het.

Geen regering kan 'n terreurorganisasie ooit heeltemal uitroei nie, want 'n terroriste -organisasie is in wese 'n ideologie.

'N Mens kan nooit 'n ideologie doodmaak nie, maar die weermag kan 'n terreurgroep se vermoë om sy eie burgers aktief aan te val, vernietig.

Oproeriges in die land moet Jode en Arabiese burgers swaar gestraf word vir oproer en vernietiging van privaat en openbare eiendom.

Elkeen wat die reg in eie hande geneem het en onskuldige mense sonder rede aangeval het, behalwe weens haat, moet dekades lank in die tronk sit met die herroeping van stemreg en 'n kriminele rekord om dit lewenslank te volg.

Enige Palestynse Arabiese inwoner van Jerusalem wat tydens die oorlog oproer, moet hul verblyf wegneem en na Gaza of die Palestynse Owerheid gedeporteer word.

As Palestynse Arabiese inwoners van Jerusalem Jode en polisiebeamptes oproerig aanval terwyl hulle Hamas ondersteun.

Sulke Palestynse Arabiese inwoners van Israel wat in Jerusalem woon, verdien nie Israeliese verblyfreg nie.

As die Israeliese regering nie spesifiek strafbrekers straf wat ons vyande skaar nie, sal onluste voortgaan om probleme te veroorsaak vir die komende dekades, selfs as Hamas weg is.


Tydlyn: die geveg tussen Israel en Hamas het 'n skrikwekkende tol geneem

'N Brand woed met sonsopkoms in die stad Khan Yunis ná 'n Israeliese lugaanval vroeg op 12 Mei in die suidelike Gazastrook.

Youssef Massoud/AFP via Getty Images

Die spanning kook in Jerusalem op. Hamas vuur vuurpyle uit Gaza af na Israel. Israel ontketen sy swaar vuurkrag, wat ongevalle en vernietiging veroorsaak. Dan herhaal dit alles weer en weer. Dit is 'n bekende, verwoestende siklus van geweld wat protes oor die hele wêreld tot gevolg gehad het.

Donderdag het die Israeliese regering 'n skietstilstand aangekondig na 11 dae van gevegte met Hamas. As die ooreenkoms geld, eindig dit die swaarste ronde sedert 2014.

Volgens Israel se bombardemente in Gaza is meer as 200 Palestyne dood, volgens die ministerie van gesondheid op die gebied, en groot geboue omvergewerp en baie gesinne verplaas.

Die meeste van Hamas se vuurpyle word deur Israeliese verdediging onderskep. Maar die aanvalle dwing Israeliete om skuiling te neem, en die vuurpyle wat daardeur kom, het 12 mense doodgemaak en skade aangerig.

Die gevegte is gewortel in die dekades oue Israelies-Palestynse konflik en kom nadat Israel en Hamas die afgelope anderhalf dekade verskeie oorloë gevoer het. Hamas is 'n Islamitiese beweging wat deur Israel, die Verenigde State en baie Europese lande as 'n terreurgroep aangewys is.

Wêreld

Aangesien lugaanvalle in Gaza tuisgaan, verg selfs 'n reis na die kombuis beplanning

Hierdie jaar het die Internasionale Strafhof 'n ondersoek begin na moontlike oorlogsmisdade wat deur Israel en Palestynse militante gepleeg is tydens die laaste ronde van swaar gevegte in Gaza, in 2014. Die hof het gewaarsku dat die jongste gevegte ook ondersoek kan word.

Hier is 'n paar belangrike gebeurtenisse in die Israel-Hamas-konflik:

September 2005

Israel onttrek nedersettings en militêre personeel uit die Gazastrook, wat hulle begin beset het nadat hulle die gebied tydens die Sesdaagse Oorlog in 1967 verower het.

Januarie 2006

Hamas behaal 'n oorweldigende oorwinning in die Palestynse parlementsverkiesings, wat 'n stryd om voorrang veroorsaak met sy mededinger, die Fatah -beweging onder leiding van Mahmoud Abbas, wat tot vandag toe president van die Palestynse Owerheid bly. Fatah is baie sterker op die Wes -Bank, terwyl Hamas die hoofmag in Gaza is.

In Junie steek militante van Hamas 'n tonnel uit Gaza oor en val 'n Israeliese militêre basis aan, dood twee Israelitiese soldate en neem dienslid Gilad Shalit vas. Israel val Gaza binne.

Hamas verdryf Fatah -magte gewelddadig uit die Gazastrook en versterk sy beheer oor die gebied. Israel en Egipte verskerp hul blokkade van Gaza, wat die ekonomie van Gaza in die komende dekade sal verwoes. Twee mededingende regerings kom na vore: Hamas in Gaza en Abbas se Palestynse owerheid op die Wesbank.

Desember 2008

In reaksie op swaar vuurpylvuur uit Gaza, begin Israel 'n groot offensief van drie weke. Na 'n 22 dae lange oorlog wat 1200 Palestyne en 13 Israeli's doodmaak, kondig die twee partye 'n skietstilstand aan.

Benjamin Netanyahu, leier van die Likud -party, word 'n tweede keer premier van Israel. Sy lang ampstermyn moedig uiteindelik Israeliese godsdienstige nasionaliste aan, wat die uitbreiding van die nedersetting versnel en dui op teenkanting teen 'n tweestaat-oplossing vir die Israelies-Palestynse konflik.

Oktober 2011

Terugskouend na Israel se dekade van Netanyahu

Hamas stel Shalit vry, die Israeliese soldaat wat hy tydens die aanval uitgevoer het in 2006. Israel stel die eerste groep vry van meer as 1 000 vrygemaakte Palestynse gevangenes.

Ook in 2011 word Israel se Iron Dome -missielverdedigingstelsel aktief en blokkeer effektief sy eerste vuurpyl uit Gaza.

November 2012

Israel vermoor die leër van Hamas, Ahmed Jabari, wat agt dae lank militante vuurpyle uit Gaza en 'n Israeliese lugveldtog veroorsaak het. Egiptiese bemiddelaars beveilig 'n skietstilstand nadat ongeveer 150 Palestyne en ses Israeli's dood is.

Israel se Iron Dome -missielverdedigingstelsel (links) onderskep vuurpyle wat Hamas vroeg op 16 Mei vanuit Gaza na Israel afgevuur het. Israel het die stelsel in 2011 geaktiveer en dit toegeskryf aan die stop van baie vuurpyle, maar sommige kom wel deur. Mohammed Abed/AFP via Getty Images steek onderskrif weg

Israel se Iron Dome -missielverdedigingstelsel (links) onderskep vuurpyle wat Hamas vroeg op 16 Mei vanuit Gaza na Israel afgevuur het. Israel het die stelsel in 2011 geaktiveer en dit toegeskryf aan die stop van baie vuurpyle, maar sommige kom wel deur.

Mohammed Abed/AFP via Getty Images

Julie-Augustus 2014

Na die ontvoering en moord op drie Israeliese tieners deur Hamas -lede, voer Israel 'n veg teen Hamas op die Wes -Bank uit, wat vuurpylaanvalle uit Gaza en Israeliese lugaanvalle veroorsaak. Die konflik van sewe weke het tot gevolg dat meer as 2 200 Palestynse sterftes in Gaza, meer as die helfte van hulle, burgerlikes is. In Israel word 67 soldate en ses burgerlikes doodgemaak. Israel kry hewige internasionale kritiek vir sy gebruik van wat die Verenigde Nasies onproportionele geweld noem.

Desember 2017

President Donald Trump erken Israel se aanspraak op Jerusalem as hoofstad en beveel die staatsdepartement om die Amerikaanse ambassade daarheen te skuif. Palestyne soek 'n deel van Jerusalem vir hul hoofstad. Hamas vra vir 'n Palestynse opstand.

Langs die omtrekheining van Gaza, voer Palestynse betogers, onder leiding van Hamas, massiewe betogings uit teen die blokkade van Gaza. Alhoewel dit meestal ongewapen is, brand baie betogers bande, gooi klippe en granate na Israeliese troepe en beskadig die omtrekheining. Israeliese troepe vermoor meer as 170 betogers oor 'n paar maande. Israel sê dit verdedig sy grens, maar word daarvan beskuldig dat hy buitensporige geweld gebruik het. Israel en Hamas voer gedurende hierdie tyd 'n aantal rondes van intense maar kort gevegte aan.

Palestyne hardloop op dekking vir traangas deur Israeliese veiligheidsmagte wat op 14 Mei 2018 naby die grens tussen Israel en die Gazastrook, oos van Jabalia, gelanseer is, terwyl Palestyne protesteer oor die inhuldiging van die Amerikaanse ambassade na sy omstrede verhuising na Jerusalem. Mohammed Abed/AFP via Getty Images steek onderskrif weg

Palestyne hardloop op dekking vir traangas deur Israeliese veiligheidsmagte wat op 14 Mei 2018 naby die grens tussen Israel en die Gazastrook, oos van Jabalia, gelanseer is, terwyl Palestyne protesteer oor die inhuldiging van die Amerikaanse ambassade na sy omstrede verhuising na Jerusalem.

Mohammed Abed/AFP via Getty Images

November 2018

Geweld vlam op nadat 'n Israeliese onderduimse aanval op Gaza sewe Palestynse militante en 'n senior Israeliese weermagoffisier doodgemaak het, wat die ernstigste eskalasie was sedert die oorlog in 2014. Militante in Gaza het honderde vuurpyle op Israel afgevuur en 'n Palestynse arbeider in die suide van Israel doodgemaak. Minstens sewe Palestyne, onder wie vyf militante, word in Gaza doodgemaak.

Die Internasionale Strafhof begin 'n ondersoek na beweerde misdade deur Israeli's en Palestyne sedert 2014.

Hamas skiet langafstand-vuurpyle af na Jerusalem ter ondersteuning van Palestynse protesoptogte teen Israel se hardhandige polisiëring van die Al-Aqsa-moskee in Jerusalem en die dreigende uitsetting van tientalle Palestynse gesinne deur Joodse setlaars. Israel loods lugaanvalle op Gaza. Die Israeliese weermag sê 3 750 vuurpyle word uit Gaza op Israel afgevuur, waarvan 90% onderskep is. Israel versterk sy lugaanvalle in die digbevolkte Gaza, omskep hoë geboue en vermoor 230 Palestyne, volgens die ministerie van gesondheid van Hamas. Israel sê militante se vuurpyle dood 12 mense in Israel. Op 20 Mei kondig die kantoor van die Israeliese premier 'n skietstilstand aan.

Hierdie verhaal is gebaseer op 'ntydlyn deur The Associated Press saam met inligting uit 'n verskeidenheid nuus- en navorsingsbronne.


Israel en Iran het ons net die toekoms van kuberoorlog gewys met hul ongewone aanvalle

Einde April het Israeliese media berig oor 'n moontlike kuberaanval op verskeie water- en rioolwaterbehandelingsfasiliteite regoor die land. Die Israeliese nasionale wateragentskap het aanvanklik gepraat van 'n tegniese fout, maar het later erken dat dit 'n kuberaanval was. Volgens Israeliese amptenare het die gebeurtenis geen skade aangerig nie, behalwe beperkte onderbrekings in die plaaslike waterverspreidingstelsels. Destyds het die berigte amper ongesiens verbygegaan te midde van die vloed van pandemie-verwante mediadekking. Israeliese media blameer Iran later vir die kuberaanval, wat deur Amerikaanse en Europese bedieners gelei is. Iran ontken betrokkenheid. 'N Nader kyk dui daarop dat kuberoorlog in 'n nuwe fase ontwikkel, waar nuwe reëls vir betrokkenheid en afskrikking op die been gebring word.

Toe, op 9 Mei, het 'n kuberaanval die rekenaarstelsels gerig op die drukste spilpunt vir maritieme handel in Iran, Shahid Rajaee Port in Bandar Abbas naby die Straat van Hormuz. Volgens Iran se hawens en maritieme organisasie, het die aanval nie deurdring na sentrale beveiligings- en inligtingstelsels nie, maar eerder die stelsels van privaatbedrywe vir 'n paar uur ontwrig. Op 18 Mei het die Washington Post noem onbenoemde amptenare wat Israel geïdentifiseer het as die outeur van 'n vergeldingsaanval. In stryd met amptelike Iraanse bewerings van onbeduidende gevolge, is die Post berig dat die aanval etlike dae lank ernstige opeenhopings op die pad en water veroorsaak het. Personeelhoof van die Israeliese weermag, Aviv Kochavi, erken nie direk die verantwoordelikheid nie, maar hy verwys na die gebeurtenis toe hy verklaar dat "Israel [teen sy vyande] sal voortgaan met 'n mengsel van instrumente."

Einde April het Israeliese media berig oor 'n moontlike kuberaanval op verskeie water- en rioolbehandelingsfasiliteite regoor die land. Die Israeliese nasionale wateragentskap het aanvanklik gepraat van 'n tegniese fout, maar het later erken dat dit 'n kuberaanval was. Volgens Israeliese amptenare het die gebeurtenis geen skade aangerig nie, behalwe beperkte onderbrekings in die plaaslike waterverspreidingstelsels. Destyds het die berigte amper ongesiens verbygegaan te midde van die vloed van pandemie-verwante mediadekking. Israeliese media blameer Iran later vir die kuberaanval, wat deur Amerikaanse en Europese bedieners gelei is. Iran ontken betrokkenheid. 'N Nader kyk dui daarop dat kuberoorlog in 'n nuwe fase ontwikkel, waar nuwe reëls vir betrokkenheid en afskrikking op die been gebring word.

Toe, op 9 Mei, het 'n kuberaanval die rekenaarstelsels gerig op die drukste spilpunt vir maritieme handel in Iran, Shahid Rajaee Port in Bandar Abbas naby die Straat van Hormuz. Volgens Iran se hawens en maritieme organisasie, het die aanval nie deurdring na sentrale sekuriteits- en inligtingstelsels nie, maar eerder die stelsels van privaatbedrywe vir 'n paar uur ontwrig. Op 18 Mei het die Washington Post noem onbenoemde amptenare wat Israel geïdentifiseer het as die outeur van 'n vergeldingsaanval. In stryd met amptelike Iraanse bewerings van onbeduidende gevolge, is die Post berig dat die aanval etlike dae lank ernstige opeenhopings op die pad en water veroorsaak het. Personeelhoof van die Israeliese weermag, Aviv Kochavi, erken nie direk die verantwoordelikheid nie, maar hy verwys na die gebeurtenis toe hy verklaar dat "Israel [teen sy vyande] sal voortgaan met 'n mengsel van instrumente."

Die buitengewoon publieke kibbergeveg tussen die aartsvyande van die Midde-Ooste bring 'n skadu-oorlog wat grotendeels in die geheim gevoer word, in 'n nuwe, meer oop fase. Net so ongewoon het albei partye gefokus op kritieke burgerlike teikens, maar het relatief lae skade aangerig. 'N Nader kyk na hierdie nuwe soort Israelies-Iraanse uitruil dui daarop dat kuberoorlog in 'n nuwe fase ontwikkel, waar nuwe reëls vir betrokkenheid en afskrikking aan die gang is.

Cyberaanvalle word toenemend erken as een van die grootste bedreigings ter wêreld. In sy verslag oor globale risiko's vir 2020, het die Wêreld Ekonomiese Forum byvoorbeeld kuberaanvalle onder die top 10 risiko's geplaas wat waarskynlikheid en impak betref. Hierdie bekommernis is nie nuut of verrassend nie. Cyberwarfare -tegnologie stel lande in staat om 'n teëstander in die geheim teen 'n relatief lae risiko aan te val. Dit is nie net die aanvaller wat ontkenbaarheid kry nie. Selfs as 'n aanval sigbare gevolge meebring, soos ontwrigting van die nasionale kragnetwerk of telekommunikasienetwerke, kan die slagoffer beweer dat dit die gevolg is van tegniese probleme eerder as om toe te gee dat dit suksesvol aangeval is.

State-sponsored cyber-operations have long been defined by secrecy, even as they have become more important as routine instruments of statecraft in the pursuit of power, influence, and security. Their covert character isn’t limited to deniability but inherent in the anonymous nature of the technological medium itself. However, as the Israeli-Iranian cyberspat shows, silence and plausible deniability have lately been giving way to public attribution. States and their agencies are increasingly acknowledging their roles—whether as victim or perpetrator.

That Iran and Israel would herald a new phase in cyberwarfare shouldn’t be surprising. Israel, the technology-driven “Start-up Nation,” is a world-leading cyberpower with vast government resources invested in digital security and cyberwarfare capabilities. Together with the United States, Israel was reportedly behind the Stuxnet computer virus—the world’s first digital weapon that specifically targeted and successfully paralyzed Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities about a decade ago. As the target of the attack, Iran in turn invested furiously in its own militarized cyber-infrastructure. While its capabilities are not as sophisticated as Israel’s, they are steadily improving, fueled by Tehran’s perception of the cyberthreat and an unremitting thirst for technological equality. States and their agencies are increasingly acknowledging their roles—whether as victim or perpetrator.

Their most recent cyberskirmish raises questions about motivations. Both adversaries targeted civilian infrastructure without, deliberately or otherwise, causing durable damage, even if Iran denied involvement while Israel apparently opted to leak details about its counterstrike. Furthermore, both sides were forthcoming about having been targeted and about the cyberattacks not having completely failed, likely preparing the ground for justified retaliation.

For Iran, the motive may be hidden in plain sight. There has been a growing frequency of Israeli strikes on Iranian assets and weaponry, and Iranian or Iran-backed fighters, overwhelmingly inside Syria. Cyber-retaliation targeting critical civilian infrastructure in Israel is one way for Tehran to strike back.

The latest skirmish appears to mark the beginning of a shift in the Israeli-Iranian cyberconflict, one that will likely be more public than clandestine going forward. Another change is the shift to strictly civilian facilities, whereas past cyberattacks have focused on traditional military or security targets. Disrupting civilian targets raises the stakes without heating up the military conflict. However, if the attacks on civilian targets are uncalibrated or botched, Israel and Iran risk escalation. Had Iran’s attack on water treatment facilities intended to tamper with, or successfully tampered with, the injection systems for chlorine, for instance, Israeli public health could have been at risk. Similarly, while disruptions at Shahid Rajaee Port are unlikely to kill, serious dislocations in the logistics chains of essential goods such as medicines could have real humanitarian consequences.

Even as cyberwarfare becomes more established and—as we have seen—moves into the public view, it is still a murky and uncontrolled realm. There are no hard international rules resembling the accepted conventions of armed conflict. This leaves state actors to push boundaries, with dangerous margins for error.

These dangers put a premium on deterring against unpredictable attacks—and there is an ongoing debate about the effectiveness of deterrence in cyberspace. That may be the biggest lesson from this latest Israeli-Iranian exchange: That Israel likely leaked its own cyberattack on Shahid Rajaee Port suggests it is pursuing three objectives one would normally associate with conventional deterrence.

First, Israel is signaling to Iran, and to other potential cyber-aggressors, that it will tolerate no attempts to strike critical civilian infrastructure. As we know from traditional deterrence, such red lines implicitly lay out the rules of future engagement. Israel’s retaliatory cyberattack suggests it is pursuing three objectives one would normally associate with conventional deterrence.

Second, Israel has demonstrated its options for retaliation—and its ability to scale up from disruption to destruction within cyberspace. Retaliation could also potentially cross over to other types of deterrence, including the military kind, although this would likely erode both states’ ability to control the ladder of escalation.

Third, Israel is communicating not just its capabilities, but also its commitment to respond to future cyber-offensives. This strengthens the credibility of its deterrence posture, even if the notion of cyberdeterrence remains nebulous. If we can assume that Israel’s cyberwarfare capabilities, including cyberdefense, remain more powerful than Iran’s, then Israel’s demonstrated red line could convey the threat of offensive responses with disproportionate effects.

Conducting a cyberskirmish out in the open would have been counterintuitive in an earlier age of cyberwarfare, when Israel and Iran might have chosen to remain silent or blame technical glitches. But their conflict has entered a new phase—and not just in the cybersecurity realm. In Syria, the Israeli-Iranian contest has already seen a shift to open quasi-warfare from earlier conflicts conducted in the shadows or through proxies. The digital wars between both adversaries—and potentially elsewhere—are also now likely to become more frequent, more open, and aimed at a wider swath of targets. Even as we see the first tenuous attempts to establish new rules for deterrence, the scope for miscalculation has just become bigger.

Gil Baram, an expert for cyberstrategy and policy, is a research fellow at Tel Aviv University’s Blavatnik Interdisciplinary Cyber Research Center.

Kevjn Lim is a doctoral researcher at Tel Aviv University's School of Political Science, Government and International Affairs. He is also a Middle East and North Africa consultant for IHS Markit.

How an Iranian Airline Tied to Terrorism Likely Spread the Virus (and Lied About It)

Why is Iran the flaming epicenter of the coronavirus pandemic in the Middle East? One of the primary suspects is Mahan Air.

The U.S.-Iran Standoff Is Militarizing Cyberspace

Trump is keen on cyberattacks to retaliate against Tehran, but that could open Pandora’s box.


“I am not a Jew with trembling knees” Menachem Begin’s reply to Joe Biden’s threats in US Senate (1982)

“…we are not to be threatened. I am a proud Jew. Three thousand years of culture are behind me, and you will not frighten me with threats. Take note: we do not want a single soldier of yours to die for us.” — Menachem Begin’s response to US Senator Joseph Biden’s threats in 1982.

Perhaps it is this, this longstanding, unwavering hostility towards the Jewish state that prompted Barack Obama to award to Vice President Joe Biden with the Medal of Freedom, the highest civilian honor in the United States during his last days in office. Or maybe it’s Biden’s outspoken commitment to deepening relations with Iran… an Islamist terror state, also dedicated to Israel’s destruction, that earned him this extraordinary honor.

Not A Jew With Trembling Knees

History often repeats itself.

On June 22 1982, Joe Biden was a Senator from Delaware and confronted then Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin during his Senate Foreign Relations committee testimony, threatening to cut off aid to Israel. Begin forcefully responded, “Don’t threaten us with cutting off your aid. It will not work. I am not a Jew with trembling knees. I am a proud Jew with 3,700 years of civilized history. Nobody came to our aid when we were dying in the gas chambers and ovens. Nobody came to our aid when we were striving to create our country. We paid for it. We fought for it. We died for it. We will stand by our principles. We will defend them. And, when necessary, we will die for them again, with or without your aid.”

[…] As a senior Israeli elected official noted, “Settlement building will be one of the basic guidelines of the next government and just as I don’t interfere in America if they build in Florida or California, they don’t need to interfere in building in Judea or Samaria.”

Senator Biden reportedly banged the table with his fist, and Begin retorted, “This desk is designed for writing, not for fists. Don’t threaten us with slashing aid. Do you think that because the US lends us money it is entitled to impose on us what we must do? We are grateful for the assistance we have received, but we are not to be threatened. I am a proud Jew. Three thousand years of culture are behind me, and you will not frighten me with threats. Take note: we do not want a single soldier of yours to die for us.”

After the meeting, Sen. Moynihan approached Begin and praised him for his cutting reply. To which Begin answered with thanks, defining his stand against threats.

Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the leader of the Revisionist movement, which both Begin & Netanyahu emanate from noted in 1940 that, “We hold that Zionism is moral and just. And since it is moral and just, justice must be done, no matter whether Joseph or Simon or Ivan or Achmed agree with it or not.”

World leaders would be apt to remember these words and times.

About the Author: Ronn Torossian is Founder and CEO of 5WPR, a leading PR Firm in New York and one of the 20 largest independently owned agencies in the United States. Ronn is an active Jewish philanthropist through his charity organization, the Ronn Torossian Foundation.


Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

In October 2020, an Israeli court ruled that several Palestinian families living in Sheikh Jarrah—a neighborhood in East Jerusalem—were to be evicted by May 2021 with their land handed over to Jewish families. In February 2021, several Palestinian families from Sheikh Jarrah filed an appeal to the court ruling and prompted protests around the appeal hearings, the ongoing legal battle around property ownership, and demanding an end to the forcible displacement of Palestinians from their homes in Jerusalem.

In late April 2021, Palestinians began demonstrating in the streets of Jerusalem to protest the pending evictions and residents of Sheikh Jarrah—along with other activists—began to host nightly sit-ins. In early May, after a court ruled in favor of the evictions, the protests expanded with Israeli police deploying force against demonstrators. On May 7, following weeks of daily demonstrations and rising tensions between protesters, Israeli settlers, and police during the month of Ramadan, violence broke out at the al-Aqsa Mosque compound in Jerusalem, with Israeli police using stun grenades, rubber bullets, and water cannons in a clash with protestors that left hundreds of Palestinians wounded.

After the clashes in Jerusalem’s Old City, tensions increased throughout East Jerusalem, compounded by the celebration of Jerusalem Day. On May 10, after several consecutive days of violence throughout Jerusalem and the use of lethal and nonlethal force by Israeli police, Hamas, the militant group which governs Gaza, and other Palestinian militant groups launched hundreds of rockets into Israeli territory. Israel responded with air strikes and later artillery bombardments against targets in Gaza, including launching several air strikes that killed more than twenty Palestinians. While claiming to target Hamas, other militants, and their infrastructure—including tunnels and rocket launchers—Israel expanded its aerial campaign and struck targets including residential buildings, media headquarters, and refugee and healthcare facilities.

On May 21, Israel and Hamas agreed to a cease-fire, brokered by Egypt, with both sides claiming victory and no reported violations. More than two hundred and fifty Palestinians were killed and nearly two thousand others wounded, and at least thirteen Israelis were killed over the eleven days of fighting. Authorities in Gaza estimate that tens of millions of dollars of damage was done, and the United Nations estimates that more than 72,000 Palestinians were displaced by the fighting.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict dates back to the end of the nineteenth century. In 1947, the United Nations adopted Resolution 181, known as the Partition Plan, which sought to divide the British Mandate of Palestine into Arab and Jewish states. On May 14, 1948, the State of Israel was created, sparking the first Arab-Israeli War. The war ended in 1949 with Israel’s victory, but 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and the territory was divided into 3 parts: the State of Israel, the West Bank (of the Jordan River), and the Gaza Strip.

Over the following years, tensions rose in the region, particularly between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. Following the 1956 Suez Crisis and Israel’s invasion of the Sinai Peninsula, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria signed mutual defense pacts in anticipation of a possible mobilization of Israel troops. In June 1967, following a series of maneuvers by Egyptian President Abdel Gamal Nasser, Israel preemptively attacked Egyptian and Syrian air forces, starting the Six-Day War. After the war, Israel gained territorial control over the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza Strip from Egypt the West Bank and East Jerusalem from Jordan and the Golan Heights from Syria. Six years later, in what is referred to as the Yom Kippur War or the October War, Egypt and Syria launched a surprise two-front attack on Israel to regain their lost territory the conflict did not result in significant gains for Egypt, Israel, or Syria, but Egyptian President Anwar al-Sadat declared the war a victory for Egypt as it allowed Egypt and Syria to negotiate over previously ceded territory. Finally, in 1979, following a series of cease-fires and peace negotiations, representatives from Egypt and Israel signed the Camp David Accords, a peace treaty that ended the thirty-year conflict between Egypt and Israel.

Even though the Camp David Accords improved relations between Israel and its neighbors, the question of Palestinian self-determination and self-governance remained unresolved. In 1987, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip rose up against the Israeli government in what is known as the first intifada. The 1993 Oslo I Accords mediated the conflict, setting up a framework for the Palestinians to govern themselves in the West Bank and Gaza, and enabled mutual recognition between the newly established Palestinian Authority and Israel’s government. In 1995, the Oslo II Accords expanded on the first agreement, adding provisions that mandated the complete withdrawal of Israel from 6 cities and 450 towns in the West Bank.

In 2000, sparked in part by Palestinian grievances over Israel’s control over the West Bank, a stagnating peace process, and former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s visit to the al-Aqsa mosque—the third holiest site in Islam—in September 2000, Palestinians launched the second intifada, which would last until 2005. In response, the Israeli government approved construction of a barrier wall around the West Bank in 2002, despite opposition from the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court.

In 2013, the United States attempted to revive the peace process between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. However, peace talks were disrupted when Fatah—the Palestinian Authority’s ruling party—formed a unity government with its rival faction Hamas in 2014. Hamas, a spin-off of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood founded in 1987 following the first intifada, is one of two major Palestinian political parties and was designated a foreign terrorist organization by the United States in 1997.

In the summer of 2014, clashes in the Palestinian territories precipitated a military confrontation between the Israeli military and Hamas in which Hamas fired nearly three thousand rockets at Israel, and Israel retaliated with a major offensive in Gaza. The skirmish ended in late August 2014 with a cease-fire deal brokered by Egypt, but only after 73 Israelis and 2,251 Palestinians were killed. After a wave of violence between Israelis and Palestinians in 2015, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas announced that Palestinians would no longer be bound by the territorial divisions created by the Oslo Accords. In March and May of 2018, Palestinians in the Gaza Strip conducted weekly demonstrations at the border between the Gaza Strip and Israel. The final protest coincided with the seventieth anniversary of the Nakba, the Palestinian exodus that accompanied Israeli independence. While most of the protesters were peaceful, some stormed the perimeter fence and threw rocks and other objects. According to the United Nations, 183 demonstrators were killed and more than 6,000 were wounded by live ammunition.

Also in May of 2018, fighting broke out between Hamas and the Israeli military in what became the worst period of violence since 2014. Before reaching a cease-fire, militants in Gaza fired over one hundred rockets into Israel Israel responded with strikes on more than fifty targets in Gaza during the twenty-four-hour flare-up.

The Donald J. Trump administration set achieving an Israeli-Palestinian deal as a foreign policy priority. In 2018, the Trump administration canceled funding for the UN Relief and Works Agency, which provides aid to Palestinian refugees, and relocated the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a reversal of a longstanding U.S. policy. The decision to move the U.S. embassy was met with applause from the Israeli leadership but was condemned by Palestinian leaders and others in the Middle East and Europe. Israel considers the “complete and united Jerusalem” its capital, while Palestinians claim East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state. In January 2020, the Trump administration released its long-awaited “Peace to Prosperity” plan, which was rejected by Palestinians due to its support for future Israeli annexation of settlements in the West Bank and control over an “undivided” Jerusalem.

In August and September 2020, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and then Bahrain agreed to normalize relations with Israel, making them only the third and fourth countries in the region—following Egypt in 1979 and Jordan in 1994—to do so. The agreements, named the Abraham Accords, came more than eighteen months after the United States hosted Israel and several Arab states for ministerial talks in Warsaw, Poland, about the future of peace in the Middle East. Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas rejected the accords Hamas also rejected the agreements.

There is concern that a third intifada could break out and that renewed tensions will escalate into large-scale violence. The United States has an interest in protecting the security of its long-term ally Israel, and achieving a lasting deal between Israel and the Palestinian territories, which would improve regional security.


The Massacre

  • On Wednesday, September 15, the Israeli army surrounded the Palestinian refugee camp of Shatila and the adjacent neighborhood of Sabra in West Beirut. The next day, September 16, Israeli soldiers allowed about 150 Phalangist militiamen into Sabra and Shatila.
  • The Phalange, known for their brutality and a history of atrocities against Palestinian civilians, were bitter enemies of the PLO and its leftist and Muslim Lebanese allies during the preceding years of Lebanon's civil war. The enraged Phalangist militiamen believed, erroneously, that Phalange leader Gemayel had been assassinated by Palestinians. He was actually killed by a Syrian agent.
  • Over the next day and a half, the Phalangists committed unspeakable atrocities, raping, mutilating, and murdering as many as 3500 Palestinian and Lebanese civilians, most of them women, children, and the elderly. Sharon would later claim that he could have had no way of knowing that the Phalange would harm civilians, however when US diplomats demanded to know why Israel had broken the ceasefire and entered West Beirut, Israeli army Chief of Staff Rafael Eitan justified the move saying it was "to prevent a Phalangist frenzy of revenge." On September 15, the day before the massacre began, Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin told US envoy Morris Draper that the Israelis had to occupy West Beirut, "Otherwise, there could be pogroms."
  • Almost immediately after the killing started, Israeli soldiers surrounding Sabra and Shatila became aware that civilians were being murdered, but did nothing to stop it. Instead, Israeli forces fired flares into the night sky to illuminate the darkness for the Phalangists, allowed reinforcements to enter the area on the second day of the massacre, and provided bulldozers that were used to dispose of the bodies of many of the victims.
  • On the second day, Friday, September 17, an Israeli journalist in Lebanon called Defense Minister Sharon to inform him of reports that a massacre was taking place in Sabra and Shatila. The journalist, Ron Ben-Yishai, later recalled:

Olympics Massacre: Munich - The real story

Article bookmarked

Find your bookmarks in your Independent Premium section, under my profile

Shortly after 4am on 5 September 1972, eight heavily armed militants from Black September, a faction of the PLO, arrived on the outskirts of Munich and scaled a perimeter fence protecting thousands of athletes sleeping in the Olympic Village.

Carrying assault rifles and grenades, the Palestinians ran towards No 31 Connollystrasse, the building housing the Israeli delegation to the Munich Olympic Games. Bursting into the first apartment, they took a group of Israeli officials and trainers hostage: Yossef Gutfreund, Amitzur Shapira, Kehat Shorr, Andrei Spitzer, Jacov Springer and Moshe Weinberg.

In another apartment, they captured the Israeli wrestlers and weightlifters Eliezer Halfin, Yossef Romano, Mark Slavin, David Berger (an Israeli-American law graduate) and Zeev Friedman. When the tough Israelis fought back, the Palestinians opened fire, shooting Romano and Weinberg dead. The other nine were subdued and taken hostage. The Palestinians then demanded the release of 234 prisoners held in Israeli jails.

So began a siege and a tragedy that remains one of the most significant terror attacks of modern times. The assault, and the nature of the Israeli response, thrust the Israeli-Palestinian crisis into the world spotlight, set the tone for decades of conflict in the Middle East, and launched the new era of international terrorism. Olympic events were suspended, and broadcasters filled the time on expensive new satellite connections by switching to live footage from Connollystrasse. A TV audience of 900 million viewers in more than 100 countries watched with lurid fascination.

Initially the Palestinians seemed to relish the attention. They felt the world had ignored them for decades. But after a day of missed deadlines, "Issa", the Black September leader, wearied of negotiations. During the evening he demanded a plane to fly his men and the Israelis to the Middle East. German officials agreed to move the group in helicopters to Fürstenfeldbruck airfield base on the outskirts of Munich, where a Boeing 727 would be waiting to fly them to Cairo. Secretly, however, the Germans began planning a rescue operation at the airfield.

Zvi Zamir, the head of Mossad, Israel's intelligence agency, arrived in Munich when the plan was finalised and was flown to the airfield just ahead of the hostages and terrorists. "When we got to Fürstenfeldbruck, it was very dark," said Zamir. "I couldn't believe it. We would have had the field flooded with lights. I thought they might have had more snipers or armoured cars hiding in the shadows. But they didn't. The Germans were useless. Useless, all the way."

Just as the Palestinians and Israelis were about to land at Fürstenfeldbruck a group of German policemen on the 727 took a fateful decision and abandoned their positions. Five German snipers were then left to tackle eight well-armed Palestinians. The hostages and terrorists landed at the airfield at 10.40pm. Issa realised it was a trap and the German snipers opened fire, missing their targets. A gunfight began, and bullets sliced through the control tower where Zamir was standing. Then a stalemate developed and Zamir realised the Germans had no idea what to do.

An hour of sporadic gunfire ended when German armoured cars lumbered on to the airfield. The gunner in one car accidentally shot a couple of men on his own side, and the Palestinians apparently thought they were about to be machine-gunned. A terrorist shot four of the hostages in one helicopter as another Palestinian tossed a grenade inside. The explosion ignited the fuel tank, and the captive Israelis burned. Another terrorist then shot the Israelis in the other helicopter. Germans present at the airfield still remember the screams. Eleven Israelis, five Palestinians and one German police officer died during the Munich tragedy. The unprecedented attack, siege and massacre had a huge impact. In many ways it was the 9/11 of the 1970s. Suddenly the world realised terror was not confined to the Middle East.

For Israel, the sight of Jews dying again on German soil, just a few decades after the Holocaust, was simply too much. Israel struck back hard. Warplanes bombed Palestinian "military bases", killing many militants, but also scores of innocent civilians and children. Hundreds of Palestinians joined militant groups in response.

When Germany released the three Black September guerrillas who survived the Munich massacre, after a fabricated plane hijacking, Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir then launched a secret operation, known by some as "Wrath of God", to hunt and kill those responsible for Munich. The exploits of the Israeli agents involved in Wrath of God are the stuff of legend and cheap farce. Over the next 20 years Israeli agents killed dozens of Palestinians. They hid landmines under car seats, devised ingenious bombs, and claim to have found and killed two of the three terrorist survivors of Munich.

The first to die was Wael Zwaiter, a Palestinian intellectualwho lived in Rome. On the evening of 16 October 1972, Zwaiter was ambling home to his flat in the north of the city and entered his block just after 10.30pm. Two Israeli agents emerged from the shadows and fired 12 bullets into his body at close range. Zwaiter died in the entrance hall.

The assassins then turned their attention to Dr Mahmoud Hamshari, the PLO's representative in France, who lived in Paris with his French wife Marie-Claude and their daughter Amina. Mossad agents have since claimed he was the head of Black September in France, but offer no real evidence. In early December 1972, while an Israeli agent posing as an Italian journalist met Hamshari in a café, at least two Israeli explosives experts entered his apartment and planted a small explosive device under a table by his telephone.

The next day, after Marie-Claude had left to take Amina to school, the "Italian journalist" rang Hamshari at his home.

"Is that you, Mr Hamshari?" asked the Israeli agent in Arabic. "Yes, I am Mahmoud Hamshari," came the response.

The Israelis immediately detonated their bomb. Hamshari was conscious for long enough to tell astonished Parisian detectives what had happened, but he later died in hospital.

Other Palestinians were eliminated in the following months, before the Israelis launched their most daring operation, sending an elite squad of soldiers into Beirut to kill three senior Palestinians. Ehud Barak, the leader of Sayeret Matkal, the Israeli SAS, and later Israeli Prime Minister, led the mission disguised as a woman, with a black wig and make-up, and hand grenades in his bra. "I wore a pair of trousers because the skirts in fashion then were a little short and narrow," Barak has said. "I also had a very stylish bag, big enough for plenty of explosives."

The killings went on for at least two decades. Mossad agents have tried to claim they targeted Palestinians directly connected with the 1972 massacre. But only a couple of the Palestinians shot or blown to pieces during the operation appear to have been directly connected with the Olympic attack. Instead the dead were mainly Palestinian intellectuals, politicians and poets. And the consequences of these so-called "targeted killings" for Israel have been appalling.

Assassination was not a regular Israeli tactic until Munich. Occasionally Israeli agents sent letter bombs to scientists developing rockets for enemy states, but it was Golda Meir who set a precedent for wholesale use of murder as a counterterrorism policy by authorising an assassination campaign in the aftermath of Munich. Since then assassination has been used to kill scores of terrorists and senior militants, including many of those responsible for major bomb attacks in Israel. In the absence of political solutions, the Israeli government and people have come to rely on targeted killings as their standard response to bombings.

However, many intelligence experts and senior Mossad officials privately admit targeted killings do not work. Assassinations spur revenge attacks on Israelis, and attacks can also go wrong. During Wrath of God, Israeli agents murdered an innocent waiter in Lillehammer, Norway. Several agents were captured and jailed. Then there are the moral and legal issues surrounding targeted killings. During Operation Wrath of God Israeli agents often killed their prey when alone. But since targeted killings became standard policy Israel has repeatedly fired missiles or dropped large bombs on targets, killing bystanders.

Until 11 September 2001, Israel was the only democratic nation obviously using targeted killings to counter terrorism. In July that year, the head of the Israeli army was forced to defend the killings after criticism from the Bush administration. But after 9/11 US policy shifted and Washington prepared a list of terrorists the CIA was authorised to kill. US officials even began studying Wrath of God for tips on how they could strike at al-Qa'ida. In November 2002, a senior al-Qa'ida commander was killed in Yemen when his car was hit by a missile fired by a pilotless US Predator.

Like their Israeli counterparts, American officials have found that once assassination is used as an occasional tactic it has a habit of becoming the norm. Predators have since been used in dozens of attacks in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen and other countries. US officials have even responded to the quagmire in Iraq by proposing the creation of special elite squads, managed or assisted by US forces. Yet using blunt military force against terrorists does not work. Even the supposedly clinical killings conducted by Israeli teams in response to the Munich massacre did not stop terrorism. Israelis are still dying in terror attacks.

Spielberg's Munich movie is unlikely to have much of an impact on the Israeli-Palestinian crisis. But it might help to remind people that state-sanctioned assassination campaigns have failed as a tactic against terrorism. Perhaps the film could also make audiences realise that if serious action had been taken after Munich to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian crisis, then 9/11 would probably never have happened.

Simon Reeve is the author of 'One Day in September', the full story of the 1972 Munich Olympics massacre, Faber & Faber, £6.99

Big Screen: Fact, fiction and the art of film-making

The Munich massacre seems an unlikely subject for Steven Spielberg to choose as the basis for his new blockbuster.

Observers had long thought of the director as a great friend of Israel. Yet with 'Munich' Spielberg has managed to anger the Israeli government, former Mossad agents, and Palestinian militants from Black September.

Spielberg's failure to contact a number of key figures while making the film has not helped. Nor has his choice of source material. The provenance of 'Vengeance', a book by the Canadian writer George Jonas, has been questioned since it was first published in 1984.

Last summer Ariel Sharon, the Israeli Prime Minister, discovered that Spielberg had been working on the movie script with the leading left-wing American playwright Tony Kushner, who has been critical of Israeli government policies. Infuriated, Sharon gave authorisation for several former Mossad members of the assassination campaign to tell their side of the story to journalists and documentary-makers, most notably the makers of an excellent new BBC documentary, 'Munich'.

The Israeli government has since waged a whispering campaign against Spielberg's movie. Officials have made it clear they think the film is "superficial" and "pretentious". Several US critics have complained that Spielberg depicts the Palestinians and the Israelis as equally culpable.

But Spielberg has strived to offer balance in a movie everyone will watch burdened by preconceptions. The suffering and death of the Israeli athletes and officials in Munich is returned to repeatedly during the film. Palestinians are actually portrayed as human beings: no small feat in a Hollywood offering.

Yet Spielberg has not made a documentary. There is no historical context and only the briefest mention of Israeli bombing raids on Palestinian camps after the Munich massacre. And while many of the Wrath of God assassinations are accurately represented, there is plenty more that is either wrong or fabricated.

Watching the film I was enthralled yet troubled. Like it or not, it is Spielberg who is deciding how the tragedy will be remembered.

'Munich', the Spielberg movie, is released this week. 'Munich', the BBC2 documentary, is on Tuesday at 11.20pm


Kyk die video: EEG de Regreso al Origen - 21082017 - Parte 15 (Oktober 2021).