The spin stops here.

By Ted Belman

IMRA offers examples of spin

    1. Spin after Hamas exploited decision of Sharon and Olmert administrations to ignore reality and avoid addressing the smuggling from Egypt to Gaza Strip: “fall of Gaza to Hamas is an opportunity”

    2. Spin after Fatah terrorists exploit proposed timeout to murder Israelis “now that Fatah has regained the respect of the Palestinian street by murdering Israelis they will be strong enough to make peace”

    3. Spin after the next shipment of weapons America supplies are turned against Israel “now the world appreciates the sacrifices Israel made to try to bolster Mahmoud Abbas”

    4. Spin after successful mega attack murders thousands of Israelis “this opens a window of opportunity for the IDF to act without concern for bad press”.]

Now Aluf Benn reports Cabinet approves transfer of withheld tax revenues

The prime minister added that at Monday’s summit in Sharm el-Sheikh he will present “our expectations as well as our demand for a fight against terror.”

“At the same time, we will declare our intention to assist the new government.”

Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni told the cabinet that any diplomatic progress would be dependant on the actions of the Palestinian emergency government.

Livni slammed Russia as well as some Arab states for refusing to give their full support to Fayad’s cabinet, accusing them of trying to revive the unity government between Fatah and Hamas and thus thwart any chance of diplomatic progress.

The spin is that Israel must offer “gestures” or “confidence building measures” to support the Abbas government. I can’t think of one instance where such gestures have resulted in increased support for Arafat or Abbas, or for that matter a benefit for Israel.

On the other hand it may be argued that making gestures increased support for their policies of intransigence and violence. Such gestures merely reward intransigence.

The Government of Israel must explain how gestures will result in Arab compromises for peace. The latter must be a precondition for the former.

Furthermore it is not enough to say Abbas is moderate or willing to compromise for peace. Such willingness must first be demonstrated by his words to his own constituency and then by action.

Rather than hold the Arab feet to the fire by demanding compromise we say what they want because they won’t say it and because they don’t want it. Similarly we call Islam a religion of peace so Muslims don’t have to take a stand on the issue.

What we say is spin and it doesn’t accord with reality. Abbas has yet to indicate his willingness for substantial compromise. If he is not willing to compromise, why are we sucking up to him.

INSS just published a paper First We Take the West Bank…? byAnat Kurz

[..] The common aspiration of Israel and Fatah to prevent the fall to the Islamist camp of the West Bank, as well, does not constitute a basis for agreement on permanent status. Fatah’s main concern now is to block the rise of Hamas power in the West Bank and to regain control in Gaza. Preparing for agreement with Israel – which entails historical concessions – is not on its agenda.

In any case, it could not impose any agreement it might negotiate. And Israel’s security and ideological reservations about territorial concessions in the West Bank will continue to complicate the task of reaching a compromise with Fatah – just as they did in the years preceding Hamas’ electoral gains.

Moreover, the current political break between the West Bank and Gaza does not relieve Fatah leaders of their obligations to Gaza residents or signal the end of Hamas’ intention to expand its presence in the West Bank. With the revival of a political process, the West Bank and Gaza will be on the negotiating table as a single entity. And any Palestinian delegation – religious, secular, or mixed – will insist on maintaining that link. Israel will not be able to ignore demands in that spirit, however much they may complicate matters.

Now that’s a bit of truth telling.

June 24, 2007 | 1 Comment »

Subscribe to Israpundit Daily Digest

1 Comment / 1 Comment

  1. It has been Israel’s policy to continuously concede in spite of the lack of reciprocity. Such a policy has advantages:

    1. It builds tolerance in the Israeli population for low intensity conflict.
    2. It presents a picture to the world of a diminutive Jewish country that is no threat to Arab or European interests.
    3. It prepares the population for “compromise” and withdrawal that will not be unlike getting a painful splinter out: thusly, we were able to justify withdrawal from Lebanon, Gaza, and Northern Samaria.
    4. It assuages the American State Department, thus preventing a public break with our closest ally and preventing America from being blamed for lack of progress.
    5. It disrupts the family life of traditional Jews who represent a threat to the left wing since traditional families, religious and/or Sephardic, out-produce the left who are by and large less interested in dedicating their daily existence to family raising and more “into self-actualization.”
    6. It reduces the pressure on the militarily ignorant government to make immediate and difficult decisions that involve military actions.
    7. It is viewed as the policy that will allow the greatest tolerance for Israeli war efforts among American and European governments when it becomes necessary to defend Israel with unconventional weapons.

    All these reasons for pursuing unilateral concessions lack candor, ensure the greater loss of life at a later time, permit the loss of innocent life on an ongoing basis, reduce the deterrence that results from a consistently strong response to mayhem and threats of mayhem, and are designed to save the hides of the leaders, rather than those they were elected to protect.

    There is nothing Jewish here at all. The principle of not standing by while the innocent blood of your brother is spilled is completely ignored. We reap what we sow.

    By the way, the worst thing I heard today is that Israel will allow Russian advisers to train and assist Abbas’ forces on the West Bank. They allowed that to occur in Syria, Lebanon and Iran as well. This is a policy akin to walking along a bridge made of vertical razor blades. One slip and you are gone. This is incomprehensible to me, unless the government intends to use Jordanian or Russian or Russian-trained forces to harass the Jews so that they will be glad to leave their homes without compensation and without the involvement of the IDF. Apparently, the government realizes its error in using the IDF for the withdrawal from Gaza. Better to use foreign forces to perform the next expulsion. What treachery!

Comments are closed.