Doc's Talk: Electing the Mayor of Jerusalem

Tuesday, October 15, 2013

Electing the Mayor of Jerusalem

Isi Leibler
October 15, 2013
http://wordfromjerusalem.com/?p=4852

Jerusalem is one of the most colorful and contentious cities in the world. It is the spiritual heart of the Jewish people. It is a city of never-ending conflict: during its 5,000-year history it has been destroyed twice, besieged, attacked, captured and recaptured over and over again. It is home to a remarkably diverse and frequently antagonistic population of 800,000 Jews, Arabs and Christians. Who could govern such a city?

Nir Barkat, the city’s current mayor, believes he can. On October 22, we’ll find out if Jerusalemites agree when they cast their votes for Jerusalem’s Mayor and City Council.

Barkat’s record is strong. After having served on the Jerusalem City Council for twelve years, Barkat was elected Mayor in 2008, largely thanks to the city’s non-religious residents who came out to vote in full force. Since then he has made tangible improvements to life in Jerusalem, from economic development to transportation enhancements and cultural amenities.

On his watch many important urban development projects have been completed or are well on their way. The city’s light rail system, which had been in development and over budget for many years, is up and running. Jerusalem’s old train station, derelict for as long as anyone could remember, has been rehabilitated as a lively shopping and entertainment area. A new bike path provides much-needed public space for exercise and social integration. A regulation-size basketball arena, which will enable international teams to compete in Jerusalem for the first time, is nearing completion.

Mayor Barkat has also revitalized cultural life in the city. He has supported countless festivals, concerts and sporting events that have revived former mayor Teddy Kollek’s vision of Jerusalem as an international city of the arts. And he has succeeded in doing this without intensifying tensions with the ultra-Orthodox - no mean feat.

Perhaps Barkat’s most important accomplishment is that he has brought accountability back to city hall. He has determinedly sought to reverse the municipal corruption that plagued former mayors Ehud Olmert and Uri Lupolianski, who remain under investigation for their alleged involvement in the disgraceful Holyland construction project, which involved bribery, illegal permitting and more. Barkat has been a responsible and upstanding elected official who has brought increased professionalism to an embarrassingly parochial, inefficient and corrupt municipal entity in which bribery and envelopes stuffed with cash had been the order of the day in relation to construction permits, re-zoning and development, building rights and tenders.

While Barkat lacks the charisma of beloved former mayor Teddy Kollek, who, during many of his 28 years in office had the highest popularity rating of any politician in the country, Nir Barkat brings his own set of skills and some good sense to the position. Barkat is a retired, highly successful high-tech entrepreneur. When elected, he took the unprecedented step of forfeiting his mayoral salary and driving his own car to work.

However his effectiveness in some areas remains to be seen. The city’s private sector remains remarkably under-developed and Jerusalem remains one of the poorest cities in Israel, with many ultra-Orthodox and Arab residents unemployed. Barkat’s master plan for a new business district near the entrance to the city, which he hopes will provide as many as 40,000 new jobs, remains just that - a plan. He also plans to further develop the light rail system and create an aerial tram to connect tourist attractions and link up to the proposed high-speed Jerusalem-Tel Aviv train. Again, good if true.

Barkat has only achieved modest progress on the important issue of preventing young, middle-class Jerusalem families from leaving the city for the suburbs and elsewhere. He has yet to overcome the primary cause of this problem: Jerusalem’s exorbitant housing prices. While he has committed to promoting affordable housing, he has yet to deliver on this issue in any tangible way. He has only talked about imposing high taxes on empty, unrented apartments - a Jerusalem phenomenon caused by the ever-growing number of foreigners who purchase apartments that they occupy only a few weeks a year, driving housing prices out of range for working families.

Similarly, Barkat also needs to continue and intensify his efforts to improve the basic needs of ordinary residents of city neighborhoods: quality schools, adequately funded community centers, better roads, well-maintained parks, and clean streets.

One of the mayor’s principal achievements was the increase in tourism. Jerusalem today has more visitors than Tel Aviv and Haifa and his ultimate target is 10 million tourists per annum which would have a massively positive impact on the city’s economy.

Barkat’s adversaries had difficulty in finding a credible candidate to oppose him in the upcoming race. Ultimately, Moshe Lion was put up to the task by Avigdor Lieberman, head of Israel Beiteinu party, and Aryeh Deri, the convicted felon who heads Shas. Joining forces in a somewhat unholy alliance, the two schemed to punish the mayor for refusing to kowtow to their demands, including, allegedly, Lieberman’s insistence that the mayor hire an under-qualified engineer to chair the East Jerusalem Development Corporation.

Moshe Lion is a well-connected accountant who was closely associated with Lieberman over many years. He has never been elected to public office and until standing for election, did not live in Jerusalem but in Givatayim, near Tel Aviv. His campaign, which has been run by Lieberman, has been aimed at the most unsophisticated and vulnerable voters. He has made wildly unsubstantiated accusations against Barkat, many of which are designed to inflame ultra-Orthodox voters.

Under fierce pressure from a number of heavyweight Jerusalem apparatchiks who were angered that Barkat had refused to concede to their demands, the Likud party has scandalously endorsed Lion. Our Likud Prime Minister disappointingly failed or was unable to intervene, despite the fact that he had lavishly praised him at last year’s Jerusalem Day celebrations and that Barkat had always strongly supported his opposition to a division of Jerusalem.

Opinion polls indicate that secular voters and the majority of national religious voters will support Barkat. But the city’s 90,000 ultra-Orthodox residents eligible to vote, Arab residents who historically boycott city elections, and apathetic citizens who stay home on Election Day could de-rail Barkat’s train.

If Jerusalem is to maintain the positive changes introduced by Barkat and continue moving forward with hope, and avoid reverting to the not-so-distant days of municipal decadence when the city’s future looked bleak, Jerusalemites must get out and vote for Barkat.

The writer’s website can be viewed at www.wordfromjerusalem.com.
He may be contacted at ileibler@leibler.com
This column was originally published in the Jerusalem Post and Israel Hayom
Some of my recent articles:
J Street Not a “Pro-Israel” Organization (October 8, 2013)
Netanyahu – “If Needed Israel Will Stand Alone” (October 4, 2013)
President Obama and Israel: Looming Confrontations (September 29, 2013)
Anti-Semitism in Belgium Reaches New Heights (September 24, 2013)

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