Iran Nuclear Deal and Israel

Iran's history of hate for Israel since the 1979 revolution that toppled the Shah, and the policy of the first Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khomeini, has continued unabated until this day. It is a paradox that the P5+1 are about to sign a treaty with Iran in order to ease the crippling sanctions imposed on it. Iran has not been brought to its knees yet and the P5+1 are showing signs of weakness towards Iran when it really should not.

Israel and all the Arab States including the Palestinians are under threat of a possible nuclear conflagration with Iran. Iran's policy of dominating the Middle East cannot be ruled out. It is unlikely that the Sunni Arab States will support Shiite Iran's quest for more influence and domination.

I wish that I could say that the Iranian regime hates Israel because of Israel's occupation of Palestinian lands. This is clearly not the case. Iran does not care about the Palestinians and makes cynical use of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict for their own political agenda of domination and influence in the Middle East.

History has a cruel habit of repeating itself in different contexts. If one were to re-examine history, we see that the same mistakes are made. An evil power will try and woo its potential enemy to make peace so that their evil agenda can be carried out unabated. An example of a big mistake occurred just prior to the World War 2. On 30th September 1938, Prime Minister of Britain at the time, Neville Chamberlain stepped off a plane after having signed a peace treaty with Adolf Hitler. He delivered his famous "Peace in Our Time Speech". Hitler had already embarked on his policies of annihilating the Jewish People, Gypsies and other peoples whom he considered inferior and needed to be exterminated to keep the Aryan race pure. This was a miserable period in British history - appeasement of an evil dictator, by a "peace treaty" that was not worth the paper on which it was written. Britain had embarked on a policy of allowing Germany to carve up Europe "for the sake of peace". There was no discussion about cessation of murder of so-called "inferior races". This was conveniently overlooked by Chamberlain. The parallel here is that Prime Minister of Britain, David Cameron, has made a courtesy call to President Hassan Rouhani (who is Khamenei's puppet) of Iran. Is Britain, like the US and EU, going to be a partner to repeat the same mistake of Neville Chamberlain in 1938? Khamanei is no paragon of human rights in Iran. Have we forgotten Iran's Green Revolution of 2009 when the opposition to the autocratic Khamanei regime was cruelly crushed by his puppet, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the Holocaust denier? Nothing has changed for the Iranian People in improving human rights.

The anti-Israel rhetoric has not ceased. Israel has every right not to trust Iran.  The purpose of the Rohani tactic is to ease the sanctions on Iran. However Iran will continue its nuclear programme clandestinely. This can be viewed as a danger to Israel and the Arab World. It is hoped that the soft-serve, pleasant rhetoric of President Rohani is not a cover for something more sinister in the mind of his boss, the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamanei. His word is the law and President Rohani's placating talk is music to President Obama's ears and the P5+1. Another hint of Iran's "peaceful intentions" is the unveiling of a new drone with claims that it can reach Israel. This drone called "Fotros" is claimed by Iran to have a range of 2000 Km enough to reach Israel and most of the Middle East. A country producing these drones does not do so unless it has an ulterior motive apart from a psychological one. It may be capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. Who knows? Can Israel and Saudi Arabia trust a country like Iran? It has nothing to do with Netanyahu's serious disagreement with the US. It goes far beyond that. If Iran showed signs of compromise and its attitude towards Israel would change to one of recognition, we would be the first to say to the P5+1 "Go for signing an agreement with Iran"! However, this is not the case.

There is a temporary problem in the signing of a treaty with Iran but at the end of the day they will sign. Iran wants to have its cake and eat it. It wants sanctions lifted as well as continue its nuclear programme to produce a bomb. Iran has secret enrichment facilities which will not be open for inspection. We cannot afford to be bluffed by Iran. If Khamenei and his evil secret police organization - SAVAK - are ruling Iran then we have every reason to doubt Iran's "peaceful" intentions. Iran is far from being a paragon of human rights. Its agenda is far from being open. We cannot afford to pander to Iran's whims and fancies.

The Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei, is the most powerful authority in Iran. The previous president,  Mahmoud Ahmadinajad, was more blunt in expressing his hate for Israel. All the presidents of Iran are subordinate to the Supreme Leader. This is no less true of Rohani. He has to carry out orders from Khamanei even though his tactics differ.

Time will tell whether Iran is trustworthy or not. It is not beyond our suspicion that Iran will hide some of their nuclear facilities from inspectors if there will be an investigation.

It looks as if Iran, EU and the US are on the eve of embarking on a honeymoon in untested waters. Iran still remains hostile to Israel and is engaged in rhetoric against Israel's right to exist.

According to reports in Haaretz, Israel's allies are softening towards Iran, Britain and Italy are examples and this will snowball to include France as well. Naturally this is a worry not only for Israel but for Saudia as well. It could create an interesting scenario of bringing some form rapprochement between Israel and Saudi Arabia, with possible military cooperation between them against Iran.

One of the conditions that should be insisted in the Geneva talks should be Iran's recognition of Israel's right to exist as well as the cessation of nuclear activity before sanctions against Iran are lifted. Unfortunately, this has not been achieved and the policy of appeasement reminiscent of the "Peace in our Time" era of Chamberlain on 30th September 1938. 

Related articles

• Report: Israel, Saudia Arabia cooperating on possible Iran attack
• French President Francois Hollande vows to take hard line toward Iran in upcoming nuclear talks - @AP
• US Military Chief: We Would Back Israel in Event of Iran Strike
• Israel threatens to strike Iran alone
• Netanyahu: Israel won't let Iran get nuclear arms
• Israel Working With Saudi Arabia On Iran "Contingency" Attack

Peace Talks between Israelis and Palestinians

Iran is talking with two voices. One voice to placate the US Obama administration with the "Ruhani moderate tactic" and the other voice to negate Israel's right to exist. Hardly surprising! Netanyahu uses the same tactics' support for a two-state solution to placate the US, while creating a situation on the ground that ensures this will never occur. The Netanyahu government continues to build settlements on Palestinian lands occupied by Israel in 1967. This is the very antithesis of a two-state solution. Even John Kerry, the US Secretary of State has made this clear to Israel in no uncertain terms.

However, on the issue of Iran, Netanyahu is correct. The US and its European partners seem to be adopting a policy of appeasement of Iran in the Geneva talks. A feeling of deja vu, maybe? In 1938 prior to the World War 2. Neville Chamberlain the PM of England at the time, negotiated with Adolf Hitler to prevent the outbreak of war. Human rights abuses in Nazi Germany against Jews, Gypsies and ethnic cleansing policies of the evil Nazis were overlooked. We all know the results of that! History has a cruel way of repeating itself. Iran is no paragon of virtue and, even though the negotiations with Iran have failed so far, the Russians under Putin towing the US behind will pressure the signing of an agreement which will be Iran's gain and the free world's loss as Iran has no intention of ceasing to produce uranium for the bomb. Why does Iran need nuclear energy when they have so much oil and also the expense involved while the country is crippled economically? Apart from that, Israel has every right to fear Iran developing nuclear capability. Iran wishes to "destroy the Zionist Regime". Nothing has changed in Iran! Iran is still under the rule of the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei and what he says is law. They are allies of Hezbollah and Bashar al Assad. Europe and the US fiddle in Geneva with them while the Middle East burns! If Iran adopted a different attitude towards Israel and recognized its right to exist while opposing the occupation then the situation would be different.

Also the chief Palestinian negotiator is the proverbial "resigner". Over the years of negotiations since the Oslo Agreements Dr Saeb Erakat has "resigned" numerous times over the same issues of disagreement and when he plays the brinkmanship game he somehow withdraws his resignation. Nothing has really changed. If anything, the two-state solution is.becoming less credible as the expansions of illegal settlements in the West Bank increases.

Facts on the ground have caused the two-state solution to become a dream or an idea that will never occur. Netanyahu knows that it will not happen, despite his verbal support for a two-state solution.

The Israelis and Palestinians are negotiating hot air under US auspices but both sides know that it is a futile exercise in polemics. The talks will drag on for the designated 9 month period and then what? The predicted break up of the talks will occur because Israel does not really have the desire to solve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is a tragedy for both sides as each side has its own claims and counter-claims which are so incompatible towards reaching a just and permanent solution.

What is characteristic about these negotiations is the total secrecy and the atmosphere under which the negotiations are being conducted. Most of us are in complete darkness as to its progress (or lack of it). It seems as if John Kerry has put a lot of eggs in the basket of the two sides to prevent a breakdown. One thing is for certain, there are no breakthroughs nor will there be in the near future. It is a polemic exercise to satisfy the ego of the Obama Administration. Occasionally there are mini-leaks of lack of progress but the show must go on until the nine-month deadline is reached come what may. Tzippi Livni, the Israeli negotiator, has her hands tied. Netanyahu has his right wing Bayit Hayehudi with Naftali Bennett at the helm to placate, including the right wing settlers in the occupied territories. Every time there is any minuscule sign of progress in talks, the right wing scream "Gewald!" and threaten to bolt the government. A greater exercise in futility in these negotiations is unimaginable.

Every time the going gets tough for Israel and news of illegal increased settlement activity gets to the press, Netanyahu resorts back to the Iranian nuclear threat as a digression and the importance of increased sanctions against Iran. While the Supreme Leader of Iran Khamanei as mentioned earlier wishes to see Israel annihilated, Netanyahu is not achieving anything by pandering to his right wing partners, who are not willing to support any form of peace treaty with the Palestinians. Surely this is a "Catch 22" situation for Israel which shows no signs of changing.

Netanyahu has scored  a "victory" by the acquittal of his right wing partner, Avigdor Lieberman, the ex-Foreign Minister soon to be reinstated as Foreign Minister once more, as the three judges in his bribery and corruption case ruled that he is innocent after an investigation of 17 years including a number of hearings in stuffy smoke-filled interrogation rooms, Israel-style, by the police investigators. This is another smack for the peace negotiations. Lieberman is an uncompromising right-winger who shoots straight from the hip and as foreign minister he has done a lot of damage to Israel's image in the world. He will be a severe obstacle to any form of compromise with the Palestinians. He will continue to damage Israel's image even further in the future.

There are strong doubts, despite Lieberman's acquittal,  to his innocence. He had one of the best criminal lawyers, Dr J. Weinroth defending him. He is one of the country’s best-known lawyers, having represented Israel’s Presidents and Prime Ministers. Market surveys in the Israeli press, and surveys among the country’s lawyers, have consistently placed Dr. Jacob Weinroth as the lawyer most people would like to be represented by in any litigation. Dr. Jacob Weinroth is an expert in criminal, corporate law, and dispute resolution in Israel. It is the same old story. The more money one has the more justice one can buy, this is especially true in Israel, where a public figure, who is essential for the ruling government coalition, has possibly done a deal with the state prosecution team where files that could incriminate Lieberman were conveniently omitted from evidence that could have resulted on a different judgement on Lieberman.

It seems that if a public figure such as Avigdor Lieberman, essential to the Netanyahu Government, who has a number of criminal suspicions against him, it is prudent to pronounce him innocent because possible  witnesses in the Foreign Affairs Office have no doubts that the long knives will come out which could cost them their jobs. They probably had a gut feeling that Lieberman would return to be their boss. Straw companies of which Lieberman had interests were swiftly signed off to other family members leaving him as pure as driven snow. Something is rotten in the court system of the State of Israel. The irony of it all is that the Minister of Police is in Avigdor Lieberman's Yisrael Beiteinu Party. Lieberman is very powerful and Bibi Netanyahu will be saddled with him as Foreign Minister because of his innocence, not because of his misdemeanors, as the judges who acquitted him, had pointed out.

These developments will make negotiations with the Palestinians even more complex as if it is not complex enough. The Lieberman-Bennett-Feiglin axis will be a severe stumbling block to a peace agreement let alone a two-state solution.













 

Related articles

• Israeli Court Clears Lieberman of Fraud Charges - New York Times
• Israeli ex-foreign minister cleared of graft
• Kerry Returns for Peace Talks With Netanyahu Amid Iran Frictions - Bloomberg
• Frustrated Kerry's peace critique a heavy slap in Netanyahu's face
• The return of Avigdor Lieberman
• Good News for those who are against dividing Israel's land: Avigdor Lieberman returns

Rabbi Ovadia Yosef: Gentiles exist only to serve Jews

Torah and Curses

Rabbi Ovadia Yosef (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Rabbi Ovaid Yosef (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Shas party logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

We witnessed a great burial circus on 7th Oct 2013 when the icon of a rather twisted, macabre mix of politics and "hell and brimstone" pseudo-Sephardi Judaism, sought greener pastures. According to estimates, 850 000 people attended his funeral. Time will tell what legacy he left his followers and even further afield beyond Israel's borders in the Jewish world of the diaspora.

There is no doubt that he was a genius in interpretation of Torah and Talmud as well as being an expert on Halacha (Jewish Law). He had made some rather revolutionary rulings in his time as well as justifying the return of occupied territory for true peace in the name of "pikuach nefesh" (saving of lives). Another example is the permitting of women (agunot), whose husbands, declared missing because of Israel's wars, to remarry. He also made rulings on Ethiopian Jewry accepting them as true Jews in Israel. We can give Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef credit for these rulings. He had made other rulings that were less publicised that in the context of Ultra-Orthodox Judaism were progressive rulings.

In this article, my intention is not to write a biography but to write about some aspects of his behavior and utterances which were intolerant, lacking in tact and were down right insulting towards many Israelis and non-Jews who did not hold his world view (or lack of it).

He began his involvement in politics and became the mentor of the Shas Party, whose sole purpose was to be in the coalition of any Israeli Government in power in order to further their own partisan interests.

These interests involved syphoning some of the tax-payers' money into their own coffers for their Yeshivot (Religious schools of Torah Studies). The purpose of the Shas Party was to fight for equality of religious Sephardi Jews from North Africa and Arab countries in the Middle East, who felt downtrodden by the Ashkenazi "elite" who were the policy makers in the Knesset.

There was a great "persecution complex" amongst many Sephardi Jews. This was partly justifiable. Anyway he got a rather motley crew of ultra-Orthodox Sephardi supporters whose records were dubious. Some of these questionable characters were charismatic and they played on the feelings of many religious Sephardim, brainwashing them about their suffering and being the underdog of the Ashkenazim. These tactics were very successful and the Shas Party gained 17 seats in the Knesset in the 1999 general election.

This Shas Party has done very little to help their Sephardi supporters. Sephardi interpretation of Judaism was always tolerant and liberal in the countries of its origin. Families were close and loving and there was never religious coercion as in the ultra-Orthodox Lithuanian tradition. Shas became a Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) religious paradox with an increasing show of intolerance towards the secular and Arabs. This was a result of the control of the Shas Party by Rabbi Ovadia Yosef.

His legacy was divisive, creating polarization between Ashkenazim and Sephardim at a time when the peoples that compose Israel's Jews were a new generation that went to school together as well as growing up in the same towns.

The paradox in the Shas Party was such that its members copied the Lithuanian Haredi-style of dress and many of them were educated in Lithuanian-style yeshivot. If you look at a Haredi from Shas and a Haredi from the Torah Judaism Party you cannot tell the difference. Many Shas members were educated in Ashkenazi Lithuanian Yeshivot which is a far cry from Sephardi institutions of Torah learning. They even sent their offspring to Ashkenazi yeshivot.

On the one hand Shas members spoke on Sephardi religious issues and uplifting their communities, in practice, they did neither. Rabbi Ovadia Yosef remained their mentor and became an icon until his death. Who knows the degree of manipulation he underwent in the inevitable factional fighting amongst the various party members in their scramble for influence and power coupled with returning many "lost souls" to the macabre Shas religious fold based on the Lithuanian Haredi tradition.

Shas established institutions not for the purpose of educating their communities to have professions that were marketable but rather to be dependent on Shas handouts to keep them learned in Torah and be "Talmidei Hahamim"( clever students eternally studying Torah in their style). This created total dependence on Shas and on handouts from the state. This remains the Shas power base today for which Rabbi Ovadia Yosef z"l played an important part in achieving.

Those Sephardim who managed to reach a par with their Ashkenazi counterparts achieved this despite Shas because of their desire to progress and achieve. Shas, by indoctrination of the economically weak, by using their narrow world view to fill their coffers and increase their power base. They provided soup kitchens for their poor and social services in order to gain power. In this tactic they are no different from Hamas.
In the last decade or two, Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef z"l had upset many people with his curses and hateful rhetoric against those who did not hold his narrow world view. His remarks about those who perished in the Holocaust lacked sensitivity and was appalling.

Was this an act of desperation against those whom he failed to return to the Ashkenazi or pseudo-Sephardi religious fold that he had devoted his life or desired to keep the Sephardi community dependent on Shas handouts from coalition deals? Who knows? He had made some horrible, hateful statements unbecoming of a person of his stature. Every time he did this he caused stormy reactions. He was surrounded by self-style "interpreters" stating that "he must not be taken literally and this is his way of spreading his wisdom in a rather original way". Weird but true.

In retrospect, he failed to uplift those Sephardim who were economically weak because of his world view - the enemy of the people his party claimed to represent and uplift to get them into the job market. He received funds for creating a greater Sephardi religious ultra-Orthodox community that does not work or serve in the Israeli Army. He was no progressive rabbi by any stretch of the imagination, the day he entered politics. He enlarged an already growing community of "hazera l'thsuva" - return to a fundamental, racist, religious fold.

One may ask: What has this to do with peace between Israel and the Palestinians? Plenty! The followers of Shas are hawkish and in later years Rabbi Ovadia Yosef spared no words in his hate for Arabs and non-Jews. If this legacy is followed, this country will move further to the right and its racist overtones.

Related articles

• The Legacy of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef
• Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, founder of Shas and Sephardi sage, dies at 93
• Ovadia Yosef, outspoken spiritual leader of Israel's Sephardi Jews, dies at 93
• The Rabbi's Choice - OpEd
• Death of Israeli kingmaker leaves huge void
• The enduring legacy of Rav Ovadia Yosef
• Rabbi Ovadia Yosef
• World Jewish Congress mourns passing of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef

Iran and Israel at UNGA

On 1st October  Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu delivered his UNGA( United Nations General Assembly) speech. It was an unimaginative speech, honed for those who support his view and his right wing Knesset members at home. His tactic of denying the Israeli UN delegation to listen to Iranian's new President Hassan Ruhani's speech at UNGA, was an emotional, childish knee-jerk reaction, which did nothing to promote Israel's interests at all. Maybe it would not have made any difference to Iran had Israel's UN delegation remained in the hall while Rohani was delivering his speech. It could have been a tactical advantage in the eyes of the countries present on Israel's readiness to cooperate with the US on the issue of Iran's nuclear weapon programme. Israel has very few allies because of the complicated occupation of the Palestinians and its denial of human rights to the Palestinians in the Occupied West Bank overlooked by Netanyahu in his speech.

Netanyahu's emphasis on democracy compared to Iran and other Arab countries is questionable. In the occupied territories, where nationalist right wing Religious Zionists live illegally wield great influence on the Netanyahu - Lieberman - Bennett Coalition. They exploit  the Palestinians, uprooting their Olive Oil Trees, Orange Groves, as well as destroying their homes.  The police have never made any arrests, despite Palestinian complaints. There is also the Price Tag violence of desecration of non-Jewish gravestones, mosques and churches. We must bear in mind that Price Tag is a movement of religious hooligans and  an offshoot of  right wing extreme nationalist ideology with its roots in the religious Zionist parties of Israel.

Netanyahu's speech just emphasized his attitude towards any form of change in Iran. He never told us anything that we do not know already. He continued his uncompromising attack on Ruhani in order to divert the world's attention from the occupation. He did mention his support for a two-state solution because it is music to the ears of the US. He talks about expecting action rather than words in the case of Iran concerning its nuclear programme. This applies to Netanyahu as well. He talks about a two-state solution but he does everything in his power to prevent it from occurring. It is not the phoney cosmetic peace negotiations that is taking place behind closed doors, but also the increased settlement activity in the occupied West Bank. This must come at the expense of the future Palestinian state. Building of settlements in the territories is not done for the purpose of demolishing them as part of a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict.

These illegal settlements ("legal settlements" in the eyes of the right wing and Naftali Bennett's Habayit Hayehudi Party - right wing Zionist religious party) are to remain according to Netanyahu. He talks about "painful concessions" that he is prepared to make for true peace and security for Israel. It is doubtful if there will be "painful concessions". He has already hinted as to what he is not prepared to do which does not leave much leeway for his more than vague "painful concessions".

So, what is Netanyahu talking about when actions are more important than rhetoric? This applies to him no less than Ruhani of Iran. He seems to overlook that in order to please his narrow group of intolerant right wing supporters. The world is seeking a new deal. A breath of fresh rhetoric is coming from Iran that is pleasing to the ears of the US. It should be pleasing to Israel as well. While it is true that Israel has every right not to trust Iran. The evil Ahadinajad has spoken many times about wiping Israel off the map. The virulent anti-Israel rhetoric coming from Iran does give cause for concern. It would have been preferable if Ruhani was more accommodating in accepting Israel's right to exist. Unfortunately he was not. He should be given more time on that issue. We should examine the content of Ruhani's speech which is a far cry from the bluster and rhetoric of Ahmadinajad. Netanyahu blew it and isolated Israel even further.

Netanyahu is oblivious of the possible "winds of change" occurring in Iran. Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, is Ruhani's boss. What he says Rohani has to accept. Whatever the motives of Iran's tactics towards the US, there is a place for cautious optimism with very strong verification that Iran's change of tactics is matched with deeds when it comes to dismantling his nuclear facilities  geared for making a nuclear bomb. There is no argumemt about that. The heavy sanctions imposed on Iran is the main reason why Iran changed its tactics. Economically Iran's situation is bad. Much still has to be achieved in order to ease those sanctions.

The Palestinian issue is an excuse for Iran's negative attitude towards Israel. Iran does not care about the Palestinians. They care even less than Israel does. This does not say very much for Iran as their human rights record towards its own citizens is appalling. The Palestinians are Sunni Muslims while Iranians are Shiites. It is no secret that Sunnis and Shiites hate each other throughout history and still do to this day. Iran wants to control the Middle East and the Arab countries are aware of this no less than Israel and this incliudes controlling the Palestinians as well, replacing their leadership with a Shiite leadership at a later stage.

Iran has a long way to go to prove that Ruhani's speech is a prelude for true peace. There are still obstacles and it is doubtful if Iran will open all its nuclear facilities for international inspection. Meanwhile Ruhani's sweet words stand the test of time p

roving Iran genuine in its attitude towards peace or not. He has not gone far enough and probably will not. He has Ayatollah Khameini breathing down his neck and it is unlikely that the latter will give him power even to make peace with Israel. We just have to adopt a wait and see attitude.

Israel has Hezbollah terrorists under the evil, charismatic leader Hassan Nasrallah, who is a supporter of the Ayatollah regime of Iran. He is not lacking in rhetoric against Israel and still has a very uncompromising and hateful attitude towards Israel. He has been placed on the back-burner for the time being and we do not know if Iran's attitude towards him will change as a result of Ruhani's rhetoric towards peace with the West.

Much groundwork still has to be done in order to confirm Iran's intentions. Iran's hostility towards Israel has to change and Israel must show its readiness to accept that change as well. It would be in Israel's interests to give Obama a chance to use diplomacy to get rid of Iran's nuclear weapon capability and give the US support. Any deviation towards Israel military action against Iran will not achieve anything. The whole Middle East is potentially under nuclear threat from Iran and the US has interests in curbing that threat to zero.

Related articles

• Netanyahu at UNGA: If Israel is forced to stand alone against Iran, it will
• Netanyahu's message of doom and gloom mars his vindication on nuclear Iran
• Livni vows to end Mideast conflict with final-status accord

The Downfall of President Morsi of Egypt.

Egypt is in a state of total chaos with the overthrow of the Morsi regime and the Muslim Brotherhood after only a year in power. While pundits for Egypt's fledgling democracy feel that it was wrong to overthrow Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood, as they were elected in democratic elections by the majority of the Egyptian People.

This is true but before I continue let us examine another parallel in history that occurred in 1933 when Adolf Hitler and his Nazi Party was elected by the German People. Germany was one of the most democratic powers in Europe. The inflation and economic situation, prior to Hitler coming into power, was catastrophic and the Germans viewed Hitler as their salvation. What he did to Jews, gypsies and all those peoples is well documented and I shall not enlarge on that here. Suffice it to say that the moment candidates are elected by the majority of the people and abuse democracy to achieve their own agenda of autocracy, censorship of the press, clamping down on the opposition, then the state is no more democratic as was the case in Nazi Germany and Egypt despite democratic elections.

Morsi had made many mistakes after he and the Muslim Brotherhood were elected. He clamped down on press freedom as starters showing the people that he has his own agenda. He rescinded that afterwards with an apology, but early in his regime he proved himself to be an autocratic leader.

When one examines the election results, Morsi did not have a landslide victory. He received only 51% of the votes cast. This means that there is a sizable opposition of 49%. He should have invited the opposition to negotiate solving Egypt's severe economic crisis which is common ground for both opposition and ruling party to cooperate in finding a solution. This should have been top priority. Morsi had other things on his mind - turning Egypt into an Islamic state following sharia law. This is hardly a solution for Egypt's massive problems. He was the wrong man for the massive rehabilitation challenges that Egypt faces. He was oblivious to the large opposition and to criticism. This resulted in dissatisfaction very early in his tenure as president.

The people became impatient with Morsi and expected some signs of improvement in Egypt's economy. A year is a short time to expect positive results, but Morsi did very little to improve the situation, or at least explain his plans to the people. There were no long term plans apart from making Egypt more Islamic. Opposition and ruling party could have united and negotiated in solving the severe economic crisis, but this never occurred and the people became even more dissatisfied with the lack of basic foodstuffs, jobs, fuel shortages and a lot more. Could one expect the Egyptian People to tolerate a deteriorating situation under Morsi despite the fact that he was democratically elected? I think the answer is obvious - no!

Egypt should have total religious freedom and separation of religion and state. This would have prevented religious, bureaucratic despots having power they do not deserve. This is also one of Israel's problems - no true separation of religion and state as I mentioned in my last post.

As the situation exists now with all the uncertainties of Egypt's future with the pro-Morsi and anti-Morsi supporters fighting each other. The Egyptian Army, who orchestrated Morsi's downfall did this with the will of a sizable and vociferous section of Egypt's people. It is not really a coup with the Army taking over power. Many people say that democracy is endangered, but is it really? Under Morsi, was democracy not in danger of collapsing?

The army invited all the various religious groups in Egypt to form a transitional government. The transitional government under the judge-president Mansour is not part of the army that has stated plainly that it does not wish to rule Egypt. Democracy in Egypt is no more endangered than it was under Morsi was insensitive to a large section of the Egyptian People.

While Army coups are not democratic, in Egypt it was the people that were catalysts in the overthrow of the Morsi - Muslim Brotherhood regime. It was not orchestrated by a despotic army leader wishing to seize power. This is a very important point when we jump to hasty conclusions saying that an army coup took place. There is no military leader that has replaced Morsi.

There does not seem to be any danger to democratic rule more now than under Morsi. He still has a lot of support and this must be addressed by the new leadership so that Egypt can move in the direction of an improved economy. This was far from being the case under Morsi. The economy which was bad enough under Mubarak became worse under Morsi. Fundamental Islamism is no cure for Egypt's woes.
The fighting between the pro-Morsi and anti-Morsi groups is escalating and there have already been a lot of casualties and some deaths. Egypt is now ripping itself apart. The army now has to prevent a civil war which is no easy feat. It will take a long time for the situation in Egypt to stabilize. It is a tragedy!

Hamas that rules Gaza has been weakened. They are an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt without the latter's pragmatism. At this stage it may not be all that relevant as far as Israel is concerned.

Egyptian Defense Minister, General Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi

As the momentum for a civil war in Egypt increases, the Egyptian Army, seen as the people's army had shot 50 demonstrators of the pro-Morsi Muslim Brotherhood. This has sent vibrations even towards many in the anti-Morsi camp who are not happy with the loss of restraint that was so apparent during the fall of Mubarak. The result is bloody mayhem with injuries on both sides rising and also increased mortality rates. The interim government seems to be losing control and the carnage is on the rise.

The situation in Egypt is becoming increasingly complex with total division between the pro and anti-Morsi factions. Morsi is held "in a safe place". What will happen after the short lived Muslim Brotherhood era of one year remains anybody's guess. Either way, the Egyptian People are in for a rough ride with hardly a light at the end of the dark tunnel of uncertainty.

Interim Prime Minister Dr. Mohammed Elbaradei

The army that had the support of the Egyptian People seems to be losing that support and that can play into the hands of Muslim extremists including those who are more extreme than the Muslim Brotherhood such as the Salafis.  This can also open Egypt and Israel to Islamist terror infiltrating into these two countries as the army could easily be viewed as allied with remnants of the Mubarak regime. It seems as if people who opposed Morsi and were active in promoting his downfall are having second thoughts. This will weaken the liberal and democratic movements who will be viewed as allies of the army whose popularity is declining.

Chief Justice Adly Mansour - Interim President

What will happen with the Interim Government's control of Egypt is anybody's guess. There are many questions that remain unanswered: Will there be peace until the date of new elections is declared? There are many Morsi supporters who will not recognize the interim government as they they maintain that Morsi was elected in a democratic election. Apart from that the Egyptian Army is losing popularity because of the shooting of close to 55 Morsi supporters. It seems like a "Catch 22" situation in Egypt which will linger on for a long time.

Corruption Cracks in the Chief Rabbinate of Israel

English: Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger עברית: הרב האשכנזי הראשי לישראל יונה מצגר, Original Image Name:יונה מצגר, Location:Haifa (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

We are all aware of the ancient saying: "Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts completely". This rings true in all the echelons of power where there are dictatorships or appointees with large powers that were given to them by the state. This holds true for religious power which becomes hegemonic. 

Many of us fail to admit that all religion was created by man, and not by a divine power, in this case- God. This is contrary to the beliefs of the three monotheistic religions whether it is Judaism, Christianity or Islam. If this is the case, religion will have the weaknesses inherent in man. Nobody is perfect and religion is not perfect either because it is man-made.

Religious people maintain that they strive to improve themselves in their relationship to their belief in God. For the purpose of this article, I refer to the monotheistic faiths, but from a wider context, this is true of all faiths.

The Catholic Church had a very severe problem of pedophilia with some priests for many years.  Many people came out of the cupboard and admitted that they were molested by pedophilic priests. This caused great damage to the power of the Roman Catholic Churches over their believers.

Where there is no separation of religion and state (by definition - separation of church, synagogue and mosque), there cannot be a true democracy.

In Islam, there are also religious leaders  with enormous power. In Arab countries, no separation of religion and state exists. Tremendous abuse of religious power is rife, not to mention the inhumane treatment of women. In Saudi Arabia, women are not even aloud to drive cars without a male chaperone as well as many other abuses to their dignity.

All organized religion not separated from the state lays itself open to become omnipotent and unquestionable to the private citizen. Everything is done according to God's will and this overrules the laws of state. Naturally rabbis, priests and imams wield tremendous powers amongst the faithful and view themselves as above secular law, whether sharia law or halacha depending whether the countries concerned are the Arab States or Israel. In the western countries where most of the population are Christian, there is separation of religion and state as well as freedom of faith and freedom from faith.

In Israel, in theory there is separation of religion and state but not in practice. Jewish People who are non-Orthodox by this I mean secular, Reform or Conservative may only get married in an Orthodox marriage ceremony which is meaningless to them. The rabbinates all over the country are under the aegis of the Chief Rabbinate and this includes every ruling from dietary laws (Kashrut) to marriages and divorce. So when people say that there is total religious freedom in Israel and nobody interferes with one's religious lifestyle. This is true until it comes to marriages, funerals and observances of Pesach, Yom Kippur and so on.

The Chief Rabbinate has become an institution of cronies, nepotism and cartels. It is involved in issues of "Jewish identity". Its rulings on who is a Jew is dependent on their interpretation of Halacha. They maintain that there is only one Halacha and non-Orthodox interpretation is unacceptable. Their attitude towards those, whose Jewishness is suspect, has created much hardship for these people not even allowing them to marry in a Jewish ceremony despite the fact that they are recognised as Jews in the Diaspora. Many Jews have been alienated from Judaism because of rabbinical rulings. The Israeli Rabbinate, with its enormous powers, has become corrupt and even the Chief Askenazi Rabbi Yonah Metzger is now suspect of a host of crimes such as laundering money, corruption and pocketing money from donations to charitable causes. Perhaps he sees himself as a charitable cause.

The moral behaviour of those in the Chief Rabbinate is deplorable and disgusting.  If we need any justification for the abolition of the Chief Rabbinate, it is in the behaviour of their rabbis and them digging their hands into the coffers of those who donated money to their questionable causes.

The alienation of the Jewish People as a result of the antics of the Chief Rabbinate will only increase especially after the demise of the Askenazi Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger.

If one were to read the history of the Chief Rabbinate of Israel, it is obvious that the philosophy and necessity of this institution is highly questionable to say the least and redundant at the most.
The Chief Rabbi is completing his tenure very soon and this is an opportune time to close down this institution instead of punting for Rabbi David Stav, who is considered a more progressive rabbi and a Zionist. I fail to see anything progressive in his observance of Halacha, which is in its essence not progressive and open to interpretation within very narrow limits.

 Of course, this is not the attitude of  Conservative and Reform Judaism to which Rabbi Stav will not be any more forthcoming than his predecessors should he be elected. He will try to coat Halacha with sugar in order to win back the secular Jew who has been alienated by rabbinical bigots of the past and present. Rabbi Stav is a honey-coated rabbi of the Tzohar Movement, but make no mistake, his claim to stick to Halacha in its entirety does not give us optimism for any change.

As far as the non-observant Jew is concerned it will be bureaucratic business as usual in the Chief Rabbinate. The blame for this must be laid at the door of apathetic Israeli citizens who have allowed this situation to occur. The solution to this problem is separation of synagogue and state and with that, the abolishment of this corrupt cartel of bureaucratic rabbinical authorities.

Another point that is very often overlooked is that the Rabbinate is not averse to racism against those who are not Jewish. Their tacit support of rabbis, of which there are no shortage, who disapprove of Israeli Jews renting out apartments to Arab students studying in Israeli Academic Institutions.

Unrest in Turkey and Syria

There are those, who say that Erdogan should be voted out by peaceful means in a democratic election. When a leader was voted in by democratic elections, becomes autocratic and oblivious to his voters needs, imprisons his opponents, the Turkish people have no patience to wait until the next elections.
They take to the streets. Violence resulting in death and injury as well as vandalism must be avoided and condemned. The Mohatma Gandhi approach is the best.
PM Erdogan had done much for Turkey. He is a charismatic leader and has widespread support from most of the Turkish Electorate. Turkey has become a powerful economic power and Erdpgan must be given credit for achieving this.
The demonstrations over the park for economic devolopment and the uprooting of trees is just an excuse or perhaps a catalyst for violent demonstrations against Erdogan and a push for change.
There is a lesson from the past that we should never forget. This may or may not be true in Turkey's case. Time will tell when more information becomes available about Erdogan's leadership and his human rights record despite the fact that Turkish leadership Turkey as the only democratic state in the Middle East with a Muslim Leadership.
In the early 1930s, Germany was considered one of the most democratic states in Europe. There were General Elections in 1933 and the Nazi Party used the democratic process to gain power. Adolph Hitler received an overwhelming majority and the Holocaust was the result. Much has been written about this bleak period in Germany under Hitler's barbaric regime. A question that comes up - although hypothetical - should the Germans have had violent demonstrations against Hitler to ovrrthrow him and his Nazi Party or wait patiently for the next general elections while democracy in Germany was being destroyed. Obviously, with hindsight, the former would have been justified.
Bearing this in mind, there is an unknown factor about Erdogan, whether he is using Turkish democracy to consolidate his power base by packing his party with burocrats and corrupt croneys. It looks as if Turkey is in a kind of a delemma over the future of its democracy.
We cannot be sure about this. The demonstrations started from the Gezi Park being developed for industry and trees being chopped down. It seems a rather insignificant reason to initiate violence on a national scale. There must be more to that than meets the eye. Turkey's constitution is secular. There is no Sharia law that is binding on a largely secular population. The question is whether Erdogan's party is trying to make Turkey into a religious Muslim state at the expense of the reforms of Kemal Ataturk to make Turkey secular is unclear.
Turkey is a pluralistic society ranging in views from the conservative religious to the secular. In between this are many groups in Turkish society that are between the two. The hard core demonstrators who wish to continue their fight against Erdogan have pledged to carry on the battle despite Erdogan's appeal to negotiate. There does not seem to be any unity in what the demonstrators want to achieve. There are communists and right wingers all having a free for all in the streets. There is no leadership that represents the demonstrators. This is what makes the situation volatile.
Not even the most democratic country on earth would tolerate demonstrations that Turkey has had. The police would come in with tear gas, water canons and even ribber bullets. Israel would not tolerate it. So the use of the term excess police force is relative. One cannot have rampaging demonstrators setting fire to public property and destroying everything in their path. This would lead to total destruction of Turkey's economy and only the Turkish people will suffer.
This is not a Turkish Spring as there is no united motive in an alternative government to Erdogan. The demonstrations will decrease in its violence apart from a few hard core demonstrators. There has been loss of life and many injuries but this is nothing compared to what is happening in Syria.
Where are the "humanists" who are the first to condenn Israel for its treatment of the Palestinians? There is a dearth of these humanists who have united with anti-Semites and pseudo communists who are no less racist than nazis and facists in their hate for Israel and the Jewish people. They do not condemn the massacres of Syrians who are being slaughtered in their tens of thousands. Even the UN is conspicious by its absence in condemning the slaughter in Syria. These double standard hypocritical, anti-Semitic "humanists" are silent over human rights abuses in Iran, Hamas-controlled Gaza, Hezbollah controlled parts of Lenanon under the "great humanist" Sheik Hassan Nasrallah. Why this double standard towards Israel? The occupation and the abuses of Palestinians in Israel has not reached the epidemic proportions of the torture of Bashar Al Assad of his own people, creating a severe refugee problem of Syrians fleeing their country of birth to neighbouring Arab countries like Jordan as well as Turkey. Not a word uttered by the "humanists" condemning this gross inhumanity. These g"reat watchdogs of human rights" subscribe to the same ideology as their "humanist mentors" in Hamas, Hezbollah and possibly other "benefactors of mankind" in Iran.
Oh! I forgot to mention the "wonderful regimes" in Darfur in Sudan' where slaughter carries on unabated with hardly a blip on our TV screens. The anti-Semitic "humanists "of the various NGOs dedicated to human rights are notoriously silent.
While the occupation is morally unjustifiable there is no wholescale massacre or ethnic cleansing of Palestinians as these hypocritical, double standard "humanists" claim. No human rights abuse should be conveniently over looked or condoned by sucking up to the Jihadists which is what the watch dog of human rights are doing by their reactions and hate for Israel. Eventually they themselves will be the victims of their own follies and naivity.

The Passing of the Two-State Solution

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (center) shakes hands with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (right) as U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton (left) looks on at the Prime Minister's Residence in Jerusalem, Israel, on September 15, 2010. Department photo/ Public Domain (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

English: Barack Obama meets with Mahmoud Abbas in the Oval Office. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

DAVOS/SWITZERLAND, 24JAN08 - Tzipi Livni, Vice-Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs of Israel and Salam Fayyad, Prime Minister of the Palestinian National Authority, captured during the session 'Middle East: After Annapolis, After Paris' at the Annual Meeting 2008 of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, January 24, 2008. Copyright World Economic Forum (www.weforum.org) Photo by Richard Kalvar (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It is with a deep sense of sadness and frustration of the passing of the Two-State Solution. It had passed away soon after the Oslo Accords, but entered a stage of  rigor mortis for many years giving people a false notion that it was still a viable solution.

The negotiations for final borders, status of Jerusalem, and ending the occupation, began as symptoms towards a final solution to the conflict. The symptoms of a two-state solution were never treated.
The  reason is that both sides to the conflict are intransigent and show no desire to end the conflict in a manner that would satisfy the parties in the conflict.

PM Netanyahu supports the two-state solution because he knows that it has passed away and will never be resurrected. It is like the belief in the coming of the Messiah among the religious. It is just not going to occur.

 President Barack Obama has sent the two-state cure, "Dr" John Kerry, to try and bring the Palestinians and Israelis to the negotiation table. He will not succeed in achieving this as his predecessors had also started with enthusiasm and then gave up. Some of the US envoys in the past were more resilient in this quest.  The two-state solution is moribund, and no matter how much one applies artificial resuscitation, it will not be revived.

The two-state solution exists as a slogan only. It suits Netanyahu because he can manipulate it the way he wishes, using it as a sop to the Obama Administration.

It is obvious that preconditions do exist on both sides despite Israel's denials. Israel is not prepared to freeze settlements apart from minor cosmetic token freezes. Illegal settlement activity in the Occupied Territories continues unabated. There are close to 350 000 settlers in the West Bank and the numbers are increasing like a cancer in the middle of the areas destined to be the areas  for the establishment of a Palestinian State. Is this not a precondition for talks with the Palestinians in practice? Israel does not build settlements in the occupied territories for the purpose of removing them in a two-state settlement, apart from small illegal outposts that do not have government approval.

The previous Palestinian Prime Minister, Salam Fayyad, was on a pragmatic track to build viable infra - structures in the occupied areas that have some autonomy under Mahmoud Abbas. He was partially successful but he resigned from his position as he lacked popularity. He had no power support base even from Mahmoud Abbas.

On the Palestinian track, there are also preconditions. As a first step, they demand a total settlement freeze before they are even prepared to come to the negotiation table. This will never be accepted by the Netanyahu Government. He gave his Minister of Justice, Tzippi Livni, the task of responsibility for negotiations with the Palestinians as soft serve maintenance of Israel's position vis a vis  the occupation. Under these conditions none of the sides will ever come to an agreement and the slogan - two-state-solution will for ever remain as such -  an idea that will fade into the mists of memory as an impractical solution, which the parties to the conflict will never achieve.

When a person passes away, the family grieves. When a possible solution passes away, there is no grieving but accusations as to who who was to blame. The two-state idea passed away because both sides did not want to bring it to fruition. Both sides engaged in rhetoric to support it as this is what the US wanted to hear very soon after the failed Oslo agreements. The naivety of the US as a peace broker also played its part in the passing of the two-state idea. They lack the knowledge of the dynamics of the Middle East.

Now Israel is burying its head in the sand and putting the idea of negotiations for a viable and just solution to the conflict on the back-burner. The Netanyahu Government is involved with internal problems and giving haircuts to Nocki Dankner, the tycoon, who has burnt his fingers with the employees pension funds and the budget tailored to burden the Israeli citizens with increased direct and indirect taxes.

An atmosphere of indifference towards peace and a solution to the conflict exists in Israel. It is as if mention of the conflict has become taboo. This is dangerous for both parties to the conflict as a new intifada can take us all by surprise - not to mention increased incidents of violence against the settlers. The settlers will remain a thorn in the flesh of the Palestinians quest for a homeland whatever form that.may take. There will be increased racist attacks towards the Palestinians by Israeli settlers in the occupied territories. This will take the form of increased destruction and damage to Palestinian property not to mention the destruction of their orchards and olive tree plantations.

Other options need to be put on the table once the two combatants are brought screaming at each other to the negotiating table by enthusiastic peace facilitators such as the US. It is doubtful if John Kerry will achieve this. Possible options that could be discussed are a federal solution, confederal solution or even a bi-national solution. There does not seem to be anything else on the market. Each possibility has its advantages and disadvantages. Time is running out for both sides to fiddle around. One thing is certain and that is the Israeli occupation must end. It is ruining the credibility of Israel in its desire not to rule another people against their will.

Related articles

• Whose 'Two State' Solution? End game or Intermission?
• End your illusion: Israeli government will never implement a two-state solution, top official says
• Report: Kerry bound for Israel next week
• PM Rejects Danon's Statement that Govt Opposes 2-State Solution
• PMO, urgently distancing itself from deputy minister's comments, says government wants two-state solution
•