Doc's Talk: Israel's Security Policy in a Changing Middle East

Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Israel's Security Policy in a Changing Middle East

Israeli defense minister Moshe Yaalon discusses how Israel is calm but cautious about the latest developments in the region.

Download PDF

Israeli Defense Minister Moshe "Bogie" Yaalon believes that Israel's recent period of relative peace could be shattered by conflict and instability spilling over from its neighbors.
Speaking to a standing-room-only audience at The Washington Institute on June 14, he provided a sweeping assessment of the risks confronting Israel today, from Iran's nuclear objectives, to the conflict in Syria, to the Palestinian campaign to delegitimize Israel. Below are highlights from his speech; for more, download the complete PDF transcript or watch video of the event.

IRAN

"We believe and we insist that, in the end, this regime should face a very clear dilemma: whether to go on with its rogue activities -- on top of it, military nuclear capability -- or to survive as a regime. That should be their objective. [There is] no doubt that this regime has come to be the main generator and instigator for instability in the Middle East. You can find the fingerprints in Afghanistan, on the wrong side; in Iraq, on the wrong side; in Bahrain, in Yemen, on the wrong side; in Syria, on the wrong side; in Lebanon, in the Palestinian arena, in Africa, in South America, in Asia, with their terror infrastructure."
"[I]n order to avoid the military option, which should be anyhow the last resort, all the others should be used and exhausted. We believe it is still achievable, but we should demonstrate more the determination and political stomach to go all the way in order to prevent a military nuclear Iran. In this regard, to conclude, I believe that the cooperation and the bond between the United States and Israel is very, very important."
"I believe that the regime's intention is to acquire the capabilities to become a threshold state and then to be ready to make the decision when and how to break out -- namely, to produce nuclear bombs...They enrich on a daily basis more low-enriched uranium, 20-percent enriched uranium, and I have the [historical] perspective. [In 2005], they had zero grams of enriched uranium; today they enriched almost eight tons of 3.5-percent enriched uranium...[and] they have 180 kilograms of 20-percent-enriched uranium. It's bad news."

SYRIA

"Al-Qaeda elements [are] coming from Iraq to Syria with the idea to destabilize Syria and then to destabilize Lebanon, destabilize Jordan and Saudi Arabia, having a stronghold in Sinai, and encircle Israel. This is the idea. The idea is to defeat Israel -- but, so far, to impose their ideology in the territories in which they operate."
"We are in a very sensitive position, of course, so any Israeli intervention might affect the side that we might support -- not for its benefit. Nevertheless, we put for the Syrian regime clear redlines -- very clear. One is not to allow any delivery of sophisticated weapons to any terror factions, militias (whether it is Hezbollah or any other faction), not to allow chemical agents to these kinds of factions, and to keep our sovereignty in the Golan Heights -- not to allow any crossing fire from the Golan Heights, intentionally, not intentionally, to our side. And when they violate, or they cross, these redlines, as we did in the Golan Heights, in any crossing fire, we act."
"The worst outcome in Syria is a chaotic situation, but we can manage it. Chaos meaning a vacuum in which al-Qaeda elements, terror elements will come in and will challenge us, will challenge Jordan, will challenge the stability of the region. I believe that we can manage it."

JORDAN

"From our standpoint, it should be very clear that Jordan is an asset in the Middle East; in terms of stability, it is a very important asset for stability in the region. And that's why we supported and we actually believe that Jordan should be supported by the United States, by other allies, in order to keep Jordan as a stabilizer in the region."

EGYPT

"In the current situation, our two defense establishments, Egyptian and Israeli, have good cooperation for the benefit of our two countries."
"With all the complexities, with all the differences between the Muslim Brotherhood ideology and the idea of having these kinds of relations with us the way that [they are] implemented now -- actually, the Egyptian commitment to the peace accord [continues]...because of the understanding that there is no way to get the U.S. financial support without being committed to the peace accord, a matter of interests."

PALESTINIANS

"[W]e are ready to sit with the Palestinian Authority, led by Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), to talk about a political process -- but, of course, to talk about everything, like recognizing our right to exist as a Jewish state (they deny it), [and] like agreeing that any territorial compromise based on agreed lines will be considered the end of conflict and finality of claims (they deny it). And, of course, there is a need to address our security needs after two decades of very bad experiences with them...[Some pieces] of territory that [were] delivered, like Jenin, Nablus, and so forth, have come to be homicide-bombing launchers and, in the Gaza Strip, rocket launchers. So we have many security grievances, let's say, that they have to meet, but let's sit at the table and discuss it. For the meanwhile, let's make progress from the bottom up. Let's improve your economy. Let's improve your governance. We want to see a reliable, accountable, responsible neighbor -- improve your competence to govern, law and order, security."
"[There is] no doubt that delegitimization has become the main tool to fight us -- delegitimizing Israel's right to exist as a nation-state of the Jewish people. The good news about it is that they tried to annihilate the State of Israel by conventional force, and they failed. They tried to keep us under attrition war, terror, rockets, and they failed. And their main effective tool is delegitimization."

TURKEY

"We should not delude ourselves. We are not going to go back to the golden age of strategic relations, until 2004. But, yes, we have prosperous trade between the two countries, a matter of interests. We do not threaten each other, of course. And we wish to have the ambassadors back in the capitals -- a diplomatic relationship -- without any illusions. But hopefully, in the end, we will solve the crisis in the near future."
Moshe "Bogie" Yaalon served for thirty-seven years in the Israel Defense Forces, rising to the position of chief of the general staff. Following his military retirement, he joined the Likud Party, winning election to parliament in 2009 and again this year. After serving as minister of strategic affairs in the previous government, he was named minister of defense in the new coalition government. Between his military and political careers, he served as a distinguished visiting fellow at The Washington Institute, where he authored the study Lessons from the Palestinian 'War' against Israel (2007).

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