The Iran deal was signed in Oslo

The Obama administration views the Iran deal as unstoppable. In the very definition of disregard for the American democratic values - this administration dismisses the facts that the absolute majority of the American public (as shown in extensive polls by both Gallup and PEW), and even the majority of American lawmakers oppose the deal. By painting the reasonable and sound opposition to what is acknowledged across the aisle as a bad deal, as egotistical, narrow minded, opposition-for-the-sake-of-opposition kind of colors, the president is the one who actually turns the issue into a partisan one, not the other way around, effectively destroying any serious discourse on the matter, and dismissing out of hand the national unity, one would think is necessary to put forward a deal of this kind.

The more than unsettling details of the proposed deal have been discussed thoroughly by this point:

The 15 years breakout time to nuclear weapon capability, the growing nuclear stockpile, the 24 days notice before inspections, the self inspections carried out by the Iranians themselves - the glaring holes of that deal and the constant American withdrawal from "red lines" are astonishing.

Another point that strikes me as highly curious is that the rhetoric used by the supporters of the deal to propagate it - is in fact the same rhetoric used by the opponents of the deal turned upside down. For example, the insult of intelligence celebrity filled propaganda video uses the same arguments the opposition uses: a nuclear Iran, an arms race in the Middle East and ultimately an Iranian bomb - except they manage to use all of those to support the clearly flawed deal. If the deal is as good as Obama is convinced, shouldn't the Democratic propagandists have actual sound arguments of their own other than ripping off and flipping over the counter arguments?

On September 08 it became clear Obama can filibuster the deal, denying such a crucial and influential decision the basic democratic decency of a vote. On September 09 the Ayatollah Khamenei, Iran's Supreme Leader, tweeted from his account:

The incitement on behalf of the Iranian leaders and public never stopped, not even during negotiations, and just against Israel (that's a given), but also against the "Great Satan" - The United States of America.

That renders the frequent critical comparison of the Iran Deal to the historic mistake of the Munich Agreement with Nazi Germany as completely unsatisfying. Nazi Germany didn't openly threaten the world with genocide back in 1938.

The only conclusion one can reach from all of the above is that the Obama administration didn't come to the table to negotiate, but rather to sign a deal.

Any deal.

What does it mean from the Israeli perspective? Is this a "new and unexpected turn for our unbreakable bond"?

I'd have to argue it's not.

From the purely Israeli perspective this Iran deal is a direct continuation of the U.S. policy in the Middle East for the past 20-25 years. The question "why?" can serve basis for an altogether different article, but is of little significance for the topic at hand. The fact remains that the embrace of the destructive two-states paradigm by both Israelis and Americans on the lawns of Oslo in 1993, stands at the foundation of this dramatic shift of alliances in the Middle East. Past ally - Israel - is now pressured to give up essential territories. Past enemies - the Muslim world - is now being sought after, pleased, appeased and favored.

No matter how pro-Israeli one can be, as long as they're operating within the two-state paradigm, a perspective, that's inescapably based on the false leftist narrative of Israel's culpability in the conflict (that I've discussed to an extent here and here), the only outcome possible is one of tearing Israel up and strengthening its enemies. A shift of alliances and priorities. Noting that, and assuming a natural escalation process since Oslo, we see the demand by a U.S. president to withdraw to indefensible borders, establish a Palestinian State (that wasn't even the original goal of Oslo), the open siding with Palestinians, the blaming of Israel in the failure of the peace process etc. On the larger Middle Eastern arena we witness the abandonment of former U.S. allied Arab leaders duirng the so called "Arab Spring" and finally the bonding with Iran against the warnings of other Middle Eastern allies.

All of those are a direct continuation of the Oslo mindset.

To emphasize the similarity: the PLO unabashedly broke each and every clause of the Oslo accords and still bore no responsibility, no negation of the failed, proven wrong two-states paradigm. In the same fashion the Iranians stalled the deadline numerous times, twisted all the American red lines, went out with everything and gave nothing back, with evidence already for breaking their parts of the deal.

Find ten differences.

Dismissing the possibility Barack Obama and his entire administration are bumbling idiots out of hand, we must conclude that the USA are changing their Middle East strategy in the deepest of senses, attracting yesterday's enemies through sacrifice of yesterday's friends. A Hillary Clinton email released at the end of July as part of her "private" emails scandal provided further proof for these conclusions, I've reached as early as February. The email revealed a Clinton adviser urging Hillary to present Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as an "obstacle to peace", and make his politics "uneasy". Although reaching several news outlets, this piece of utterly scandalous information didn't hit shockwaves around the world. There was no media frenzy, no diplomatic outrage.

Nothing.

Realizing how much BS is in the allegation that "Bibi is ruining the Israeli-US relations" and not the other way around, is realizing just how correct Netanyahu was to go against Obama on the Iranian deal, as publicly as he did, Congress speech and all. Not that he ever stood a chance, not with a president so adamant on signing the deal, but he secured a number of serious advantages:

1. He won the battle of public opinion both in Congress and among the American people.

2. He strengthened and put gravitas to the anti-deal arguments.

3. Since Israel wasn't a party to the Iran talks (much to the gloat of Israel's haters), the Iran deal has no legal binding on Israel under international law. Israel remains legally free to pursue its safety in alternative ways.

4. After Netanyahu went the whole nine yards with the diplomatic option, giving it every possible chance, sticking to it still, no one can accuse him of "warmongering".

Israeli politicians should start noting the shift in American policy and stop panicking over it.

One battle might've been lost, but the war is far from decided.

Israel supporters in the U.S., stop voting Democrat.

Start using your brains!

Tweet

The yearly Arab Christmas scam

Every year around Christmas a clever routine has been figured out by the Anti-Israeli campaigners. From the best minds of the unholly Islamist-leftist coalition comes the scam, that shamefully hijacks Christmas, to shock the average Western media consumer. The purpose is, as always, the demonization and vilification of Israel. And it works. Just look at what The Independent twitted on December 25th - the day of Christmas:

No normal human being can remain indifferent in the face of such "injustice". No human being can ignore the suffering of the "poor Palestinians" at the hands of the "evil Zionist occupation". And on the most sacred of holidays, close and dear to everyone in the world too!

A picture is worth a thousand words, and this would, understandably, be the natural human reaction to such an image. I don't doubt that this was the emotion, The Independent Twitter editor was guided by, when he retwitted the image. Yet, since pictures do tell us a thousand words, let's not miss a single one. Look at it closely. What's that lying on the ground on the left side of the image? Besides the foot of one of the paramedics? And in the hand of the other? That's right, it's a gas mask. And why would a "peacefully protesting" "Santa" need a gas mask? Well, that would be why:

Photos by Iyas Abu Rahma.

The scam works as follows: Arab provocateurs dress up like Santa and then go on violent riots against the IDF and/or The Border Police. When the violent riots are suppressed, amazing, perfect, highly effective photos are ready for the gullible world media - photos of struck down Santas!

Works like a charm every year.

Now, here are a few crucially important facts to know and realize about Bethlehem. The believed birthplace of Jesus Christ, has been almost entirely emptied of Christian population. Since the implementation of The Oslo Accords in 1995, the city was governed by the Palestinian Authority. Since then the life of Chrisitians in the town has been made practically impossible by their fellow Muslim Arabs. From a Christian majority under Israeli rule, the Christian population in Bethlehem has dwindled to less than 7% under Palestinian rule, and roughly a thousand leave every year. Most Bethlehem Chrisitians live abroad today. Muslims pretend to be Christians for tourists. Muslims pretend to be Christians for Pope's visits. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10]

That "peaceful Santa protester"? 93% he's not a Christian.

Christy Anastas, a Christian from Bethlehem, tells her story in Uppsala University earlier this year.

Another popular, recurring line of "narrative" is the "Mary and Joseph meeting the IDF" storyline. "What would happen if Mary and Joseph would come to Bethlehem today?" The fallacy claims "Joseph and pregnant with baby Jesus Mary would be stopped at an Israeli checkpoint, at the security barrier, by the IDF. Oh, those evil Zionists!"

The reality is, as usually, vastly different. If there was no security barrier in today's situation, the couple of Jews, Mary and Joseph, would have been lynched by a crazed Arab mob upon entering Bethlehem. Tragically, this is not a mere "racist slur". Exactly that happened in another Palestinian governed city - Ramallah in 2000. A crowd of some 1,000 Arabs, who were minding their own daily business just moments before, quickly flocked together demanding the blood of Israelis, who mistakenly entered the town. 

So Mary and Joseph, if alive today, would thank God for having the security given to them by the IDF.

The projections of leftist fantasy (left) and the grim reality of Ramallah, 2000.

The reality, of course, infuriates the Islamist-leftist agitator. In reality Israel is the only safe haven for Christians not only in the entire Middle East, but also in the entire North Africa. Israel is the only place in the region where Christians, just like any other religious confession, are free to worship as they please.  Israel is the only place in the region where Christian population actually grows. Israel is the only place in the region where Christians are not only not persecuted, but are encouraged to take an active part in soceity.

Much like in Bethlehem, Christians are persecuted in the entire Muslim world. 

Raymond Ibrahim, author of 'The Al Qaeda Reader', explains.

So, enjoy this beautiful Holiday Season, wether you celebrate Hannukah, Christmas or The New Year. May this season finally bring more quiet than conflict to the world.

And may you use your brain every day this new year!

Tweet

Yom Kippur and false conceptions

Last Saturday Jews in Israel and Worldwide observed Yom Kippur. A day of repentance, forgiveness, fasting, prayer and soul searching.

This is also the anniversary of the 1973 Yom Kippur War, a war that is largely remembered in the Israeli consensus as the most traumatic. A coalition of Arab armies led by Egypt and Syria attacked Israel on its holiest day, in what is generally seen by the mainstream Israeli discourse as a "great surprise" and the result of Israeli "complacency". Some scholars put in on par with the greatest military surprises of the 20th century: Operation Barbarossa and the attack on Pearl Harbor.

This year, 41 years later, just like any other, Israeli newspapers, tv shows and internet portals all dealt deeply with that war, providing even more new stories, angles, insights, excuses and apologies. Much is said about a sort of a PTSD the nation still suffers from 41 years later. Interestingly enough, if we look at the results objectively, it's easy to put Yom Kippur War in the same line with The War of Independence and The Six-Day War along with Israel's greatest victories. Just to put things into perspective: the unanimously-agreed "triumphant" Six-Day War lasted (as the name suggests) for 6 days; the generally-considered "disastrous" Yom Kippur War lasted for two weeks and a half. Helplessly outnumbered and surprised in the beginning, the war ended in the outskirts of Cairo and Damascus, not Tel-Aviv and Jerusalem. It was after the Yom Kippur War that the Arab countries' ambition to destroy Israel by force was crushed, (turning instead to propaganda and "indigenous" narratives). And still, perhaps in line with the Yom Kippur traditions, we keep repenting and searching within ourselves, trying to realize how did we go "so wrong"? What lessons can we learn from the mistakes of 1973? How can we make sure we don't repeat them?

IDF accepts surrendering enemy soldiers in Egypt (left) and Syria in 1973.

And here comes the interesting part: the mainstream is convinced the great surprise of the attack was allowed by the "false conception" the command was trapped in. The intelligence knew of the Arab armies' preparations, the soldiers in the Sinai peninsula saw the movement of the Egyptian forces, Golda Meir received the warning of King Hussein of Jordan, and still the false conception prevailed. The conception the Arabs will not actually dare to attack. Now let me ask you: if that was indeed the case, are we not wasting Yom Kippur War's lessons away? Are we not trapped again in a false conception?

For some 20 years now Israeli governments, left and right, operated within the paradigm of the two-states solution, "land for peace" formula and the belief that only the establishment of a Palestinian country in the very heart of our own will solve all our problems. This, however, was tried and failed numerously. If there's indeed any science in "political science", then these "experiments" and "observations" must be taken into the most serious of consideration.

1. Israel went through with the Oslo Accords, establishing (and arming) the Palestinian Authority, relinquishing control over Areas A and B in Judea and Samaria, hoping this would end violence and become a step towards peace. Instead we received a rise in violence, terror and bombings. It took Operation "Defensive Shield" and the construction of the Security Barrier to bring bloodshed coming from the PA to a halt.

2. Israel left Lebanon in 2000. Hezbollah took over and started terrorizing the Israeli north with missile fire. Israel had to return and engage Hezbollah in 2006 in what was dubbed the Second Lebanon War.

3. Israel disengaged from the Gaza Strip in 2005, extracting all military and civilian presence and pulling back to the revered (pre-)67 borders. Instead of establishing a prosperous Palestinian state, Hamas (who took over by force in 2007 after winning the elections by a landslide) invested millions (millions!) of international aid money in its terror industry. Millions that could have went to infrastructure and welfare. Since then three military operations and counting were needed to block Arab aggression against Israel.

Infographic taken from http://www.idfblog.com.

If the main disagreement between PM Benjamin Netanyahu, who is considered to be a right wing conservative and Zehava Gal-on, leader of the far left Meretz party is where the border with the future Palestinian state would be, how many Jewish "settlers" will be evacuated, will Jerusalem be divided or not, then at the end of the day both of them are operating within left-of-center, destructive, proven wrong time and again paradigm. We are trapped once again in a false conception. This conception tells us to ignore the realities on the ground and the historical precedents for the sake of some pre-constructed ideas, and believe the hostilities towards Israel will magically stop with the establishment of a Palestinian state. Lest we want to repeat the mistake of Yom Kippur, we must start thinking outside the box. The excuse of the left used to be "well, what is your alternative?", suggesting there's no choice but the two states. Well, now we have a countless array of classical right wing alternatives. It's time to be original and brave and invest the money, intelligence and think tanks that go into the "peace process" industry towards finding an actual working and lasting solution. Sure, it's not going to be easy and it is going to be very expensive. There are no magical solutions. But all is better than a certain suicide.

Happy Tishrei holidays, all!

Don't stop using your brains!

Tweet