The day ends earlier now, and
Shabbat comes in sooner. By next week it will be considerably sooner yet,
as we turn back our clocks here on Saturday night.
And so, here I wish simply to
touch on a few themes, some of considerable concern:
The first issue to
address today circles back on the matter of the Muslim attacks on US
installations. I have already alluded to the pathetic rush to apologize that has
been exhibited by members of the Obama administration, but it goes beyond
that:
The American government is moving
towards a policy of throwing out protection of free speech -- a first amendment
right under the US constitution -- in order to stifle criticism of
religious groups (read Islam, including radical Islam). There are
some who see this as a step towards legislation that makes criticism
of a religion a crime. Such legislation exists in
Europe.
Every American citizen who cares
about traditional American values needs to be concerned about this and take
action to ensure that such a thing never happens.
See, please, this piece by Lori
Lowenthal Marcus, an attorney, regarding video ads, made by the
government and paid for by American citizens, that show the president
saying, "Since our founding, the United States has been a nation of respect –
that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious
beliefs of others." And Hillary Clinton saying, "America’s commitment to
religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation."
Not a word about
the American value since the founding of the nation to protect the right of
others to speak.
~~~~~~~~~~
There is the assessment by several
analysts that Muslim radicals are specifically utilizing the recent
unrest to make demands that America limit free speech.
Caroline Glick, in her piece
today, writes (emphasis added):
"[Muslim Brotherhood chief Yussuf]
Qaradawi...called on his followers to stop rioting against the US. Rather than
attack the US, Qaradawi urged his Muslim audience to insist that the US place
prohibitions on the free speech rights of American citizens by outlawing
criticism of Islam...
"...Rather than accept this basic
truth [that the rioters hate America for what it is] and defend the American way
of life, Obama has doubled down in the only way now available to him...He,
his administration, his campaign and his supporters in the media...have
responded with a campaign of political oppression...
"...There is a difference
between appeasing parties that have been harmed by your actions and appeasing
parties that wish your destruction...
"To appease a party that
hates your way of life, you must change that way of life. The only way
America can appease the Muslim world is for American to cease to be
America."
Do not delude yourselves: this is a war of civilizations.
~~~~~~~~~~
The fact that Syria, which is in
flames, possesses large caches of non-conventional weapons is something that,
quite frankly, is scary as hell. I have written about this now and
again and it's time for another mention.
It's not only Israel, the most
obvious target, that is concerned -- this generates great unease among the
European nations and the US, and there has been talk of various nations sending
in troops to secure those weapons (to keep them from getting in the wrong
hands), should Assad fall. Apparently the weapons cache has been
divided and parts are now stored in various places in Syria. The greatest worry
has been with regard to who among rebel forces might gain use of such
weapons. (Especially here in the Middle East, as we're seeing again
and again, no assumptions should be made about those trying to take down a
murderous despot necessarily being nice guys.)
There is always worry that Assad,
were his back pushed to the wall, might use them against his own
people, his assurances that he would not do so not withstanding.
Additionally there has been unease about the possibility that he
might give such weapons to Hezbollah. Now talk of
this has surfaced again -- with the suggestion that if things
were going badly for Assad he would have a "what the hell"
attitude.
See this article on a Syrian test
of a chemical missile system:
http://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/blog/2012/09/syria-test-fires-chemical-missile-system
This is something to be watched closely. And, I trust, our own IDF and Intelligence forces are monitoring very carefully indeed, with intent to move if necessary. (There has been reluctance to consider bombing these weapons caches because of the air pollution that would result, but who knows...)
This is something to be watched closely. And, I trust, our own IDF and Intelligence forces are monitoring very carefully indeed, with intent to move if necessary. (There has been reluctance to consider bombing these weapons caches because of the air pollution that would result, but who knows...)
~~~~~~~~~
I haven't mentioned our old
friend Mahmoud Abbas, putative president of the PA, in a while.
He's been trumped by bigger stories. Abbas is desperate, however, as his
PA is in terrible straits and there have been large scale demonstrations
protesting one thing and another -- most notably a dismal economic
situation (about which I hope to have more to say soon).
Abbas's response to tough
times is not to grapple with them with serious intent to improve the situation.
Rather he makes make grandstand announcements -- either as threats
(accommodate me, world, or this is what I'll do) or to convince the PA
populace that he's "doing something." Those announcements vary from day to
day. A number of reports have come out in recent days, and I've let most
of it slip right by me.
One threat has been to renounce
Oslo. That one amuses me, because the Palestinian Authority was established by
virtue of Oslo -- no Oslo, no PA. But of course they're not intending
it this way.
According to a Saudi paper article
the other day, Abbas has notified the PA to find a replacement for him by the
end of September, because he's quitting. My friends if I had a shekel for
every time Abbas said he was quitting, I'd be a wealthy woman today.
Although, I suppose at some point he really will quit.
~~~~~~~~~~
The last threat, and the one being
taken most seriously, is Abba's intention to go to the UN for Palestinian state
recognition. Yes, that again.
Last time Abbas failed because he
tried to go through the Security Council and was stymied. Now, he says, he
intends to bring his request to the General Assembly when he
addresses that body on September 27, which is this coming Thursday.
First Abbas said he was going to
seek an upgrading of PA status from observer to "non-member state."
He indicated that he was confident (and in this he likely is correct) that
he will have a majority of the Assembly (150- 170 nations) with
him.
~~~~~~~~~~
It happens that I sat in a
meeting with an Israeli lawyer who is an expert in international law
this past week. The subject of Abbas's bid came up at one point, and he
said precisely what every other expert in international law I consulted
last year told me: the UN cannot create a state. The PA does not even
fulfill the requirements for a state, and what Abbas would be granted, at most,
would be "state" status strictly within the UN (with some possible perks
that are not fully clear). Period.
Abbas cannot seek membership in
the UN as a state because that requires approval of the Security Council, and he
will not secure that.
He now says that he will also
seek a General Assembly specification of the terms for a negotiated
two state solution. That is, he wants the UN to declare that Israel must come
into negotiations accepting that their basis is the '67 line (not a border) and
that half of Jerusalem is for the Palestinian Arabs. This is unmitigated
nonsense. Talk.
~~~~~~~~~~
Abbas claims that increasing
PA status in the UN will "help rekindle the peace process." This too is
talk, but an attempt at smart talk: he's trying to avoid the accusations that he
is circumventing the peace process by saying he's trying to reinvigorate it.
Unmitigated nonsense twice over.
Secretary-General Ban Ki Moon has
stated that this unilateral step by the PA is unwise because matters should be
resolved via negotiations.
~~~~~~~~~~
The Prime Minister's office has
responded to Abbas's announcement, but not as forcefully as I would have
wished. Abbas's direction was termed "a mistake" and a "blow to the peace
process." But it's not a "blow," from which one can recover,
if properly identified: it's the kiss of death as Oslo forbids such
unilateral actions.
Spokesman Mark Regev was a big
stronger, saying that "such a unilateral action would be viewed as a
violation." But no, it wouldn't be "viewed" as a violation, it would
BE a violation.
What I see is that the
Israeli government is not prepared, not yet, to say, OK, we've had it -- you
refuse to come to the table for the negotiations mandated by Oslo, and
you've taken unilateral actions; now the deal's off and we will take our
own unilateral actions (such as annexing Area C).
What broader circumstances would
have to prevail, and how hard would the PA have to push, before Netanyahu
would see it as time for this? He knows full well that there is no "peace
process," and so what he says in regard to pursuing the negotiations is
just talk, as well.
~~~~~~~~~~
©
Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner,
functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be
reproduced only
with
proper attribution.
This material
is transmitted by Arlene only to persons who have requested it or agreed to
receive it. If you are on the list and wish to be removed, contact Arlene and
include your name in the text of the
message.
No comments:
Post a Comment