We welcome your comments to this and any other CIJR publication. Please address your response to: Rob Coles, Publications Chairman, Canadian Institute for Jewish Research, PO Box 175, Station H, Montreal QC H3G 2K7 –
Contents:
Bibi’s Win Trumps Israeli Left, and Obama, Europe—Now Comes the Hard Part: Dealing, Largely Alone, With Iran: Frederick Krantz, CIJR, Mar. 19, 2015 —In an election worthy of the American 1948 Presidential campaign, in which the media overwhelming proclaimed Thomas Dewey the victor over Harry Truman well before the vote was taken, the people of Israel have overwhelmingly given Bibi Netanyahu, Likud and the center-right a renewed electoral mandate.
Netanyahu Wins Elections Despite Hate Campaign Against Him: Manfred Gerstenfeld, CIJR, Mar. 19, 2015— The election results for the 20th Knesset determined both major winners and major losers.
Security Challenges of the New Israeli Government: Prof. Efraim Inbar, BESA, Mar. 19, 2015 — A new Likud-led government will take office in Jerusalem in the upcoming weeks.
The Absence of True Leadership Has Created Chaos at Home and Abroad: Victor Davis Hanson, National Review, Mar. 19, 2015 — What has gone wrong with the U.S. government in the past month?
Indian PM Modi Congratulates Netanyahu in Hebrew: Jerusalem Post, Mar. 18, 2015
The Role of the Palestinian Authority in Israel’s Election Results: Alan Dershowitz, Algemeiner, Mar. 18, 2015
Israel Election: What Netanyahu's Victory Means: Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Fox News, Mar. 18, 2015
After Harsh Editorial, Watchdog Group Says New York Times Has Anti-Netanyahu Obsession: Algemeiner, Mar. 18, 2014
BIBI’S WIN TRUMPS ISRAELI LEFT, AND OBAMA, EUROPE—
NOW COMES THE HARD PART: DEALING, LARGELY ALONE, WITH IRAN
Frederick Krantz
CIJR, Mar. 19, 2015
In an election worthy of the American 1948 Presidential campaign, in which the media overwhelming proclaimed Thomas Dewey the victor over Harry Truman well before the vote was taken, the people of Israel have overwhelmingly given Bibi Netanyahu, Likud and the center-right a renewed electoral mandate.
Despite immense internal and external pressures, Likud outpolled the Zionist Camp opposition by at least 30-24 (final figures aren’t yet in), and the other conservative and religious parties amassed more than enough votes to ensure a conservative governing majority. This as newspaper headlines across Europe and North America proclaimed a Herzog victory (or, at worst, “A Tie”, or “A Vote Too Close to Call”).
What this means is that the serious, widespread, and growing security concerns facing Israel—from the IS terrorists in Syria and Iraq to Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon (and now Syria), to the al-Qaeda-linked anti-al-Sissi terrorists in Sinai, and above all to the Iranian Islamist regime and its nuclear drive—trumped social and economic concerns.
It also means a defeat for Barack Obama and his Administration. After Netanyahu’s powerful address to the US Congress opposing Obama’s imminent nuclear pact with Iran as a “bad deal”, the people of Israel refused to be stampeded by the full-court press of an anti-Bibi campaign. Led by Administration, and European, figures and organizations, this included direct and indirect support, from left-wing NGOs to former Obama Administration political advisors micro-managing a U.S.-style Zionist Camp campaign against Likud.
(As of this writing, Obama—who called Netanyahu’s campaign reference to a swelling United Arab List turnout “racist”—had yet to make a congratulatory phone-call. But Stephen Harper tweeted congratulations to Netanyahu, noting that Israel “had no greater friend than Canada”; and India’s Modi sent a mazal tov, in Hebrew, to Bibi.)
Now, the social and economic concerns of Israelis are real enough, and should not be ignored (nor will they be, as Moshe Kahlon’s Kulanu party, which focused on them, will surely be part of the new coalition). But it was also unfair to represent Netanyahu—who as Finance Minister had successfully turned the Israeli economy around, insulating it from the general Western post-2008 Great Recession—as blind to the material well-being of ordinary Israelis.
Those issues will be addressed. But what Israel must now squarely face is what Netanyahu eloquently warned of in his Washington speech–the overwhelming threat of a genocidal and nuclear-armed Islamist Iran. To the shame of the West, the EU, UN and the “international community”, Israel must face that threat alone.
And it must do so in the face of what is becoming increasingly clear: not only a Obama Administration determination, for “legacy” reasons, to trumpet a diplomatic “victory”, but a conscious policy “tilt” in favor of terrorist Shiite Iran (of which the “bad [nuclear] deal” is only a part).
Yet, paradoxically, Obama’s policy has made Sunni Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates—who fear Iran-led Shiite expansion–de facto allies of Israel.
Israel’s “window” for dealing with the Iranian threat is narrow. Netanyahu will no doubt wait to assess the impact of Congressional reaction to a signed deal. But if Obama ignores Congress and signs, and the Senate then fails to marshal the two-thirds vote necessary for overcoming a veto and re-imposing severe sanctions), Netanyahu and Israel will face a stark choice: act or back down.
Hence the larger significance of the Right’s victory: the people of Israel, despite increasing world pressures and a vicious “delegitimation” campaign, understand clearly what is at stake, and have elected a government which has not only the capacity, but the will, to act.
Extraordinarily, and unfortunately, the election also ratifies what many have feared since the election of Obama in 2008: a growing confrontation between Israel and its only major ally, the U.S. Despite broadly negative media commentary, this has been provoked not by Israel or Netanyahu, but by a “progressive” President with a tin ear for what Israel represents. Obama has pursued a pro-Islamic vision of righting “colonialist” wrongs perpetrated by the West, including his own United States, against the Arab-Muslim world.
As a consequence, American policy, and standing, in the Middle East is in a shambles, and the formerly bedrock U.S.-Israel relationship imperiled, facts clearly reflected in the Israeli electorate’s resounding decision.
NETANYAHU WINS ELECTIONS DESPITE HATE CAMPAIGN AGAINST HIM
Manfred Gerstenfeld
CIJR, Mar. 19, 2015
The election results for the 20th Knesset determined both major winners and major losers. Yet just a few days earlier, while looking at the polls, one could have still justifiably argued that there was not much need for the elections – the expected results of the various political blocs seemed broadly similar to those in the outgoing Knesset.
The main winner of these elections, even more so than his Likud party was Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. He had become a general target, and the attacks were not limited to those of the opposition parties. A variety of people outside the political realm, such as a group of about 200 former senior defense and intelligence officials, published advertisements and campaigned against Netanyahu.
The Likud had taken a huge beating back in the 2013 elections when it ran together with Avigdor Liberman’s party, Israel Beitenu. In the outgoing Knesset it only held 18 seats. It will now have 30 seats. The Zionist Union’s distorted central message was that Netanyahu had totally failed in leading the country. Its party leaders, Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni, claimed that the only logical consequence was that Netanyahu had to go. The Zionist Union’s claim was false. At a time of major economic problems around the world, Israel has done quite well. In the military field, Israel is far from a failure. Netanyahu has also resisted considerable foreign pressure to cede more territories to the Palestinians, most of which would probably have turned into additional areas controlled by the Islamo-Nazis of Hamas.
Another big winner of these elections was Moshe Kahlon’s new Koolanu party. Kahlon is a former Likud MK whose main merit as Minister of Communications was the radical reduction of telephone and internet costs. Although his party list did not have many nationally known candidates, it managed to get 10 seats. It will be impossible for Netanyahu to form a government without Koolanu. Kahlon will most likely become the Minister of Finance, a position for which he campaigned and which Netanyahu already promised him before Election Day. Strategically, Kahlon might be better off obtaining the Minister of Housing portfolio, as he could then reorganize the Israel Land Authority and manage to lower housing prices. Housing costs are a strong concern for a large number of Israelis. The Housing ministry may still be held by one of Kahlon’s party members.
A third clear winner was the Joint (Arab) List. During the 19th Knesset, Israel Beitenu had managed to get majority support in favor of raising the elections threshold from 2% to 3.25% of the total vote. Liberman thought that a higher election threshold would result in the elimination of some of the smaller Arab parties. However, the various Arab parties represented in the Knesset managed to overcome their differences for the purposes of establishing a joint list, consisting of communists, Islamists and Arab Palestinian nationalists. The Joint List also succeeded in raising the Arab voter participation. The Joint List obtained 13 seats, as against 11 of the various Arab parties in the 19th Knesset combined. They might have been helped by a very ugly comment by Netanyahu on Election Day where he declared that Jewish citizens should get out and vote because the Arabs were voting in massive numbers.
The losses were quite pronounced as well. The Yesh Atid party, officially centrist but in practice leaning toward the Zionist Union, got 11 seats as against 19 in the previous Knesset. Its charismatic leader, Yair Lapid, seemed to have managed to shake off most criticisms of his responsibilities as Minister of Finance, yet it didn’t help him in the elections. The religious parties all lost some of their electorate. The modern-Orthodox Habayit Hayehudi, led by Naftali Bennett, returns with 8 seats as against 12 in the present Knesset. In the last few days, many of its voters apparently deserted to the Likud. Shas, in the first election after the death of its religious patron Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, came down from 11 to 7 seats. United Torah Judaism lost one of its 7 seats, partly due to the call of extremist Rabbi Shmuel Auerbach to boycott the elections. Finally, the Yachad party, led by former Shas leader Eli Yishai, did not pass the election threshold. All in all, the religious parties obtained a combined 21 seats as against the 30 seats they held in the 19th Knesset. Two of the religious Yesh Atid MKs, Gen. (res.) Elazar Stern – formerly of Hatenuah — and Rabbi Dov Lipman, lost their seats as well.
Another major loser was Israel Beitenu. It ended up with 6 seats as against 13 in the outgoing Knesset. This outcome has most likely been influenced by a major corruption scandal that came to light at the beginning of the election campaign, in which a key party member MK Faina Kirschenbaum, stands accused. Another loser was the extreme left-wing party Meretz. It lost one of its 6 seats. When it looked that it stood to lose a second seat, its leader Zahava Galon announced that she would take responsibility and leave both the Knesset and party leadership so that number 5 on their list, Tamar Zandberg, could remain a Knesset member. Galon has in the meantime rescinded her resignation.
The Zionist Union is incorrectly perceived as another major loser of the elections. Yet Herzog, by running a joint list of his Labor Party together with Livni’s Hatnuah, managed to create the second largest political faction in the country, well ahead of all the others. The Zionist Union won 24 seats as against a combined 21 seats the two parties got in the previous elections. As no polls are allowed two days before Election Day, the general public sentiment, according to the last of the published polls, was that the Zionist Union was ahead of the Likud by several seats. In the last few days before the elections, the Likud made a furious effort to regain ground. One major element of its campaign was its participation in the massive right-wing rally held in Rabin Square, Tel Aviv on the night of Sunday, March 15th. Netanyahu also contacted many voters with a pre-recorded telephone message, right through and including on Election Day.
The three exit polls held by Channel One, Channel Two and Channel Ten were massively erroneous. They gave the Likud 27 or 28 seats, as against 27 seats for the Zionist Union. These numbers were already considered a huge success for the Likud, in view of the last polls published before the elections. There is less of an excuse for those responsible for the highly inaccurate exit polls, as compared to those who published the many dozens of polls throughout the campaign. It may well have been that many voters, right up to getting to the ballot box, changed their voting intentions. The most logical option for a coalition seems to be one backed by 67 MKs. It would include besides the Likud, Habayit Hayehudi, Shas, United Torah Judaism, Koolanu, and Israel Beitenu.
The challenges before the new government are great. The socioeconomic concerns of the electorate are substantial. The delegitimization campaigns against Israel will only get stronger. This the more so as Netanyahu has come out against the establishment of a Palestinian state. The relationship with the US needs major improvement. It is not only an issue of personal tensions between the leaders of the two countries. Such an improvement can only be possible to a limited extent while the White House is occupied by President Barack Obama. During his presidency, the worldwide status of the US has declined greatly. Obama has also frequently ignored or even whitewashed extreme crimes emerging from many parts of the Muslim world.
[To Read the Full Article With Footnotes Click the Following Link—Ed.]
SECURITY CHALLENGES OF THE NEW ISRAELI GOVERNMENT
Prof. Efraim Inbar
BESA, Mar. 19, 2015
A new Likud-led government will take office in Jerusalem in the upcoming weeks. The government will have to face many security challenges emerging from the turbulent strategic environment. The most important issue is Iran. The US is racing toward an agreement that will legitimize the nuclear threshold status of Iran. Many key Mideast powers have signaled their displeasure with the nascent accord, as well as their desire to develop uranium enrichment capabilities on par with Iran. The American attempt to offer a nuclear umbrella to forestall regional nuclear proliferation – which is a strategic nightmare – is doomed to failure. No Arab leader trusts President Obama. Therefore, only a military strike to destroy the Iranian capability to produce fissionable material needed for nuclear bombs can stop nuclear proliferation in the region.
The only country with ‘enough guts’ to do this is Israel. This decision must be taken by the next Israeli government. The timetable for such a strike is not to be determined by additional Iranian progress on the nuclear path, but by the perceptions of regional leaders of Iranian ambitions and power. The expansion of Iranian influence to Iraq and Yemen, in addition to its grip over Syria and Lebanon, has heightened threat perceptions. American willingness to accept a greater Iranian regional role undermines American credibility and underscores the need for Israeli action in the near future. An Israeli strike is needed to prevent nuclear proliferation and to prevent imperial and Islamist Iran from acquiring hegemony in the Middle East. History indicates that such Israeli actions are not welcomed by American administrations, but are highly appreciated later on. In this case, it is Israel that will have to save the Americans from themselves. Israel’s main challenge is to maintain its freedom of action, while on a collision course with current American policy. This is not an easy endeavor, but Israel has large reservoirs of goodwill in the US which should allow Israel to act on its cardinal security interests against the will of an unpopular American president.
Despite the fact that some of the Arab armies that posed a threat to Israel have largely disintegrated and the power differential between Israel and its Arab neighbors grows constantly, the Jewish state still faces great hostility from Islamist sub-state armed groups. Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad cannot conquer Israel, but have acquired impressive capabilities to cause massive damage to Israel. Large armored formations are still needed to tackle those challenges. In addition, Israel’s active defense missile capabilities must be augmented. Unfortunately, the IDF is underfunded, which has led to cuts in ground forces and in training for the regular army and its reserves. Whoever will be the new defense minister has the task of securing a much larger, multi-year military budget on which the IDF can definitively plan a sustained force build-up. Israel’s strong economy can definitely sustain larger defense layouts. Another area that needs attention is the navy. Over 90 percent of Israel’s exports travel via the East Mediterranean. Moreover, this area is rich in energy resources that are vital for Israel’s future prosperity. Yet, the East Mediterranean is increasingly becoming an Islamic lake.
Turkey under Erdogan grows more hostile every month. Syria is an Iranian ally, and its civil war has brought about the rise of Islamist militias of all kinds. Lebanon is largely ruled by Hezbollah – a Shiite radical organization aligned with Iran. Hezbollah occasionally perpetrates attacks against Israel and has threatened to hit Israel’s gas rigs at sea. Hamas, a radical Sunni terrorist group linked to Iran, has taken over Gaza. It has launched thousands of rockets into Israel and staged attacks on Israeli gas installations in the Mediterranean. In Sinai, a plethora of Islamist armed groups are challenging the sovereignty of Egypt and even attacked targets along the Suez Canal. Libya is no longer a real state and the Islamist militias are fighting to carve out areas of influence. In short, we may soon see real piracy and terrorist attacks in the East Mediterranean…
[To Read the Full Article Click the Following Link—Ed.]
THE ABSENCE OF TRUE LEADERSHIP
HAS CREATED CHAOS AT HOME AND ABROAD
Victor Davis Hanson
National Review, Mar. 19, 2015
What has gone wrong with the U.S. government in the past month? Just about everything, from the fundamental to the ridiculous. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the United States to warn Congress about the dangers of a nuclear Iran. He spoke without the invitation of an irritated President Obama, who claimed that he did not even watch the address on television. Obama declined to even meet with the Israeli prime minister, announcing that it would have been improper for him to have such a meeting so close to Netanyahu’s re-election bid.
But if Obama was so concerned about not influencing the Israeli elections, why, according to some news accounts, is a Senate panel launching an investigation into whether Obama’s State Department gave grant money to a nonprofit organization, the OneVoice Movement, that sought to unseat Netanyahu with the help of several former Obama campaign operatives? Then, 47 Republican senators signed an unusual letter to the Iranian theocracy, reminding it that any agreement on Iran’s nuclear program negotiated with the Obama administration would have to first clear Congress.
Obama shot back that the senators’ letter was undue interference that aided the Iranians. Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton agreed that the senators were either empowering Iranian hardliners or sabotaging the diplomatic efforts of their own president. Secretary of State John Kerry concurred. Nonetheless, the Senate may well pass new sanctions against Iran, if it feels Obama has been too lax in its negotiations or usurped senatorial oversight of treaties. Senator Robert Menendez (D., N.J.) bucked the Obama administration and expressed doubt about administration concessions to the Iranians. Other Democrats could join him. But almost immediately after weighing in on Iran, Menendez found himself the target of a federal investigation into purported corruption. And as far as the claim of improper interference in foreign affairs goes, the Obama administration and British prime minister David Cameron jointly lobbied U.S. senators not to pass tougher sanctions on Iran…
Abroad, Syria, Iran, and the Islamic State are battling for what is left of the Syrian-Iraqi borderlands after the United States abruptly pulled out all its peacekeepers from Iraq. All are enemies of the U.S. But as they fight each other, the Obama administration is negotiating with Iran over its efforts against the Islamic State. The administration has also expressed a willingness to meet with Syrian president Bashar Assad, after not long ago declaring Assad an illegitimate leader who should step down. Obama had issued red-line threats to Assad over the gassing of his own people…
Meanwhile, in the midst of nightly demonstrations at Ferguson, Mo., a young demonstrator on parole allegedly shot two police officers. “Whoever fired those shots shouldn’t detract from the issue,” the president editorialized. But trying to gun down a policeman should amount to something more than a “detraction.” Obama’s own Department of Justice recently issued a report indicating that the Ferguson Police Department routinely violates the rights of black citizens. But the DOJ also found Officer Darren Wilson’s shooting of a charging Michael Brown justifiable. That shooting was the incident that began the Ferguson “issue” in the first place. Was Obama worried about the wounded policemen “detracting” from the protestors’ “hands up, don’t shoot” allegations, which Attorney General Eric Holder’s investigators, along with a grand jury, had already debunked?
All this chaos has taken amid ongoing IRS and VA investigations, the Supreme Court’s impending decision on the constitutionality of Obamacare, and Saudi Arabia arranging to buy from South Korea nuclear expertise to counter Iran. The common thread in all this chaos? More than the usual partisanship at home and barbarism abroad. No one seems to be in charge at the White House. And that has terrified America’s supporters and emboldened its enemies — with another two years to go.
Indian PM Modi Congratulates Netanyahu in Hebrew: Jerusalem Post, Mar. 18, 2015— Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi congratulated Prime Minister Netanyahu in Hebrew following the Likud party's success in the elections.
The Role of the Palestinian Authority in Israel’s Election Results: Alan Dershowitz, Algemeiner, Mar. 18, 2015—Those around the world who are upset with Prime Minister’s Benjamin Netanyahu electoral victory over labor should put much of the responsibility for Israel’s rightward turn squarely where it belongs: on the Palestinian Authority.
Israel Election: What Netanyahu's Victory Means: Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Fox News, Mar. 18, 2015—“Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." That Churchillian one-liner summarizes the glorious chaos that is Israeli politics.
After Harsh Editorial, Watchdog Group Says New York Times Has Anti-Netanyahu Obsession: Algemeiner, Mar. 18, 2014—The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) told The Algemeiner today that The New York Times has an anti-Netanyahu obsession.
Contents:
Visit CIJR’s Bi-Weekly Webzine: Israzine.
CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing is available by e-mail.
Please urge colleagues, friends, and family to visit our website for more information on our ISRANET series.
To join our distribution list, or to unsubscribe, visit us at https://isranet.org/.
The ISRANET Daily Briefing is a service of CIJR. We hope that you find it useful and that you will support it and our pro-Israel educational work by forwarding a minimum $90.00 tax-deductible contribution [please send a cheque or VISA/MasterCard information to CIJR (see cover page for address)]. All donations include a membership-subscription to our respected quarterly ISRAFAX print magazine, which will be mailed to your home.
CIJR’s ISRANET Daily Briefing attempts to convey a wide variety of opinions on Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish world for its readers’ educational and research purposes. Reprinted articles and documents express the opinions of their authors, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research.
Rob Coles, Publications Chairman, Canadian Institute for Jewish Research/ L'institut Canadien de recherches sur le Judaïsme, www.isranet.org
Tel: (514) 486-5544 – Fax:(514) 486-8284 ; ber@isranet.wpsitie.com
