Doc's Talk: EU Directive to Humiliate Israel on East Jerusalem and Settlements

Tuesday, July 16, 2013

EU Directive to Humiliate Israel on East Jerusalem and Settlements

Yori Yanover

Published: July 16th, 2013

Two enemies of Jewish life beyond the "green line," Israeli President Shimon Peres and EU Foreign Policy Chief Catherine Ashton, shaking hands. The EU, in collaboration with the likes of Peres, have come up with an ingeniously evil plan to divide the Jews of Israel.
Photo Credit: FLASH90

This is a proper 9 B'Av story, not so much because it bears destruction of some vital financial and cultural concerns for the Jewish State, but because it will surely deepen the divide inside Israel's population, between left and right, or, more accurately, between those inside the green line and those on the other side.

Some antisemitic expressions are visceral and spontaneous, and so make it easier to regard them as part of the antisemite's disturbed personality and move on. But some, very much including the subject of this story, are obviously the brainchildren of a committee, in this case a collaboration between Israeli leftists and the most repugnant elements inside the European Union.

Violating my own rule that the first one to mention the Holocaust in a debate loses, I feel compelled to say that to start a pogrom all you need is a bunch of peasants and a highly motivated priest, but to start Auschwitz you need the Wannsee Conference.

Ha'aretz reported Tuesday morning that, on June 30, the European Union has published a binding directive to all 28 member states forbidding any funding, cooperation, awarding of scholarships, research funds or prizes to anyone residing in the Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria and in East Jerusalem. In addition, the directive requires that any future deal to be signed with Israel must include an item that determines that the settlements are not part of sovereign Israel and therefore are not part of the deal.

As always in these cases, only Ha'aretz had this scoop this morning. This is because Ha'aretz often has a direct hand in cooking the stories it then gets leaked to. Did they also choose the date of publication carefully, to land on 9 B'Av? Are they that inspired?

The new directive, disseminated by the European Commission—the executive arm of the European Union—sets the parameters of cooperation between the EU and its member countries and Israeli private and governmental entities in the years 2014 through 2020. It is expected to take effect this Friday, July 18.

A senior official in Jerusalem who spoke anonymously to Ha'aretz said the new directive is dramatic and constitutes "an earthquake." The most significant part of the directive is the "territorial item" which appears for the first time as a compulsory component in all deals between Israel and the EU. The new item determines which areas inside Israel are eligible to receive cooperation from the EU and which are not. It determines that deals would pertain only to areas within the EU-recognized, pre-1967 Israeli borders.

"This is the first time that such an official, explicit directive is being disseminated by the EU institutions," the senior official said. "Until today there were understandings and there were tacit agreements that the EU does not operate beyond the green line, but now they've turned it into an official and binding prohibition."

The anonymous senior official pointed out that although there are some concrete ramifications to the new directive, its effect is mostly political. It will mean a humiliating blow to any Israeli government signing any contract with the EU or a member country, each time stating for the record that Judea and Samaria and East Jerusalem are not an integral part of the state.

According to Ha'aretz, there's a great deal of anxiety in the prime minister's and the foreign offices, and that desperate attempts by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Deputy Foreign Minister Ze'ev Elkin to prevent the directive have failed. Senior officials at the EU have suggested that they are interested in maintaining a dialog with Israel on this matter, but since the directive takes effect this coming Friday chances are low for even a temporary suspension.

The new directive has an exception for dealing with Israeli government entities which physically reside in east Jerusalem, such as the Ministry of Justice, but only if the subject of discussion is within the green line.

"We will have to decide what we're doing as of today," another senior Israeli official told Ha'aretz. "We are not prepared to sign on to such an item in our contracts with the EU. We can say as much to the Europeans, but the result may be the termination of our entire cooperation in the areas of the economy, science, culture, sports and academia. It would inflict a heavy damage on Israel."

The European Union delegation to Israel pointed out that the new directive was actually intended to prevent an all out boycott of Israel, and to enable the Jewish state to remain part of the cooperation programs of the EU, as well as receive the relevant financial funding.

"We want to make sure that Israel's participation is never put in queation and that it will be able to benefit from all the opportunities being offered by the new economic framework for the years 2014-2010," a statement released by the EU delegation said.

Aren't they nice to us? The question is, do they really believe they're doing Israel a huge favor by humiliating its government into choosing between money—a lot of money at that—and its remaining shreds of dignity.

Even I, who have supported Jewish life in all of Israel most of my adult life, find it difficult to imagine the true extent of this evil move. This goes beyond any bullying on the part of the EU regarding internal Israeli affairs. This is a brazen effort on the part of Israel's Left and its European anti-Zionist allies to go behind the backs of the vast majority of Jewish voters in Israel and enforce here policies that are clearly against the broadest consensus, like our sovereignty over East Jerusalem.

One fast and clear way to respond—give a proper Zionist response—to this bullying, is for the Knesset to pass, this week, if possible, before Friday, the proposed bill of MK Ayelet Shaked from Jewish Home and Yisrael Beiteinu’s MK Robert Iltov to limit foreign entities’ NGO donations. Under the proposed new bill, an organization will not be permitted to receive donations from a foreign political entity more than NIS 20 thousand (roughly $5,500) in one year, if said entity rejects the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish and democratic state, calls for a boycott of Israel, or promotes the prosecution of IDF soldiers abroad.

Fight back, for heaven's sake.

About the Author: JewishPress.com Senior Internet Editor Yori Yanover has been a working journalist since age 17, before he enlisted and worked for Ba'Machane Nachal. Since then he has worked for Israel Shelanu, the US supplement of Yedioth, JCN18.com, USAJewish.com, Lubavitch News Service, Arutz 7 (as DJ on the high seas), and the Grand Street News. He has published two fun books: The Cabalist's Daughter: A Novel of Practical Messianic Redemption, and How Would God REALLY Vote.
© 2013 The Jewish Press. All rights reserved.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/eu-directive-to-humiliate-israel-on-east-jerusalem-and-settlements/2013/07/16/
Scan this QR code to visit this page online:

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk