Truth be told, the Israel/UAE accord proves Europe's absolute irrelevance to the Israel-Arab conflict - by Elder of Ziyon

Europe, pretending to be relevant, is happy to fund organizations that actually hurt any chances for peace. This massive funding has perverted the Palestinian economy itself - the best paying jobs outside Israel come from these anti-Israel NGOs, which contribute nothing towards actual productivity and make it unappealing for Palestinians to become productive and independent citizens, creating and exporting useful goods and services.

Elder of Ziyon..
02 September '20..

Gerald Steinberg of NGO Monitor makes some excellent points about the irrelevance of Europe to the Israel/Arab conflict and how their outdated views of the region are actually anti-peace.

The EU was notably absent on the El Al plane from Tel Aviv to Abu Dhabi. There were no EU officials and no EU flags, either on the plane or on the face masks of the Arabs who greeted the Israelis. Why not?

As Steinberg writes,

Almost all EU diplomats, foreign policy officials and 'experts', operate through simplistic misguided prisms based on post-1945 images of normative (soft) power, rules-based international order, and other thinking that is .totally inapplicable to the Middle East. As a result, Europe has little credibility.

The Israel-UAE agreement is based on realpolitik and national interests -- security (the Iran threat), economic, cyber threats and others. European diplomacy in 21st century has no capacity for contributing in these dimensions.

Europe's foreign policy on Israel offers nothing positive and tangible. Their main tools are threats of sanctions (aimed at Israel only), ritual anti-Israel UN votes, and massive funding to fringe anti-Israel NGOs under the facade of aid and human rights. This is in total contrast to the US.

For Palestinians, Europe is a very reliable cash cow and amplifier of slogans, including their supposed powerlessness and victimhood. No matter what Palestinians do - terror, incitement, ICC lawfare - European money keeps flowing. But for substance, Palestinian leaders have (until very recently - EoZ) turned to the US.

Europe is narrowly focused on the Palestinian issue (and stuck in the 1970s); they treat Israel condescendingly, and their "peace proposals" and frequent declarations consist entirely of empty slogans. Systematically stuck in the 1970s (or 1950s), Europe is blind to Israel's role as a major regional actor, interacting with other countries on the basis of significant capabilities and shared interests.

Opposition to the Iranian strategic threat is a major catalyst for Israel-Gulf cooperation. In contrast, Europe's policy on Iran is based on slogans and reviving the ill-conceived JCPOA, allowing the regime to acquire nuclear weapons. These policies are non-starters.

To play any useful role in the region, Europe needs an entirely new approach to Israel, Iran, the UAE and other Gulf states. The people and myths that have dominated Europe's approach for decades need to retired and replaced by diplomats and experts with both feet on the ground.

Steinberg is correct. It is no coincidence that each one of Israel's peace agreements with Arab countries have been facilitated by the US with no European involvement. The Europeans treat the Palestinians as spoiled children with no responsibility for their actions, and one cannot make peace with irresponsible toddlers.

Gulf countries have, in recent years, given the Palestinians the message that they are not the center of the universe and they can no longer assume reflexive support and unlimited cash from their fellow Arabs.

(Continue to Full Post)

EUBAM - Europe’s failed (and forgotten) Gaza monitors - by Gerald M. Steinberg

Forgotten in this historical reckoning is the European Union’s role in this process, and the failure of the EU to provide the guarantees they had pledged to fulfill in 2005.

Gerald M. Steinberg..
JPost/Opinion..
20 August '20..
Link: https://www.jpost.com/opinion/europes-failed-and-forgotten-gaza-monitors-opinion-639383

The 15-year anniversary of Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza has been accompanied by a wave of painful personal and political memoirs, amid a difficult debate on the wisdom of Ariel Sharon’s sudden policy shift.

The latest round of “balloon terrorism” from Gaza that is torching the fields and trees of southern Israel, and the periodic rocket attacks, sending thousands of Israelis into shelters in the middle of the night, are reminders that the hoped-for quiet was an illusion.

Instead of using the withdrawal as an opportunity for economic development to lift the people of Gaza out of poverty, the Palestinian leaders have diverted international aid into cross-border attack tunnels and rocket brigades.

Largely forgotten in this historical reckoning is the European Union’s role in this process, and the failure of the EU to provide the guarantees they had pledged to fulfill in 2005.

After Israel’s withdrawal, the EUBAM (European Union Border Assistance Mission) was deployed at the Rafah crossing point between Gaza and Egypt. The mission consisted of some 60 police and customs officials “to help bring peace to the area,” ostensibly by monitoring traffic in order to deter smuggling of weapons into Gaza.

According to the agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, EUBAM would monitor the performance of the PA in operating the crossing and had the authority to order the re-examination of persons and goods that passed through the crossing if PA examinations proved unsatisfactory.
From the beginning, this EU monitoring presence was a failure, and far from demonstrating Europe’s potential contribution to peace, it demonstrated the chasm between high-minded talk and the reality of conflict and terrorism on the ground.

Weapons smuggling continued, and on December 30, 2005, a few weeks after their initial deployment, EUBAM monitors fled Rafah to the safety of an Israeli military base when Palestinian police officers stormed the crossing, in what was described for media and diplomatic consumption as a “protest demonstration”.

Three months later, the monitors fled once again following a wave of foreigner kidnappings in Gaza.

(Excellent) Note to the EU and UN: The Palestinian leopard does not change its spots - by Charles Abelsohn

The time has come for the UN and the EU to recognize that the only parameter and framework relevant to Israel are that the Palestinian leopard has not, and apparently cannot and will not, change its spots. Both pre-1967 and post 1967, the Palestinian policy is for violence and terrorism against Israel`s very existence. The policies of the EU and UN strongly promote the Palestinians needing to be rewarded for their anti-Israel terrorism and violence since 1949.

Charles Abelsohn..
TOI Blog..
27 July '20

In 1948 the independent state of Israel was declared. The armies of several Arab armies invaded what was mandatory Palestine, intended to be the Jewish homeland under the San Remo Agreement. Much of Samaria and Judea was captured by the British officered, trained and supplied Trans-Jordanian forces. In 1949 cease fires were declared and armistice agreements entered into between Israel and several Arab states.

Trans-Jordan itself changed its name to Jordan and then renamed the captured area of Samaria and Judea as the West Bank. For the first time in its history, Jerusalem was divided. The Jordanians expelled the ancient Jewish community from the Jewish quarter of the Old City. The Holy Places, being the Western Wall, Rachel`s Tomb and the Temple Mount, were all held by Jordan and Jews and Israelis were not permitted access to their Holy Places despite provisions explicitly permitting access in the armistice agreement. In the Old City, now held by Jordan, 58 synagogues were destroyed and the ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives desecrated. Egypt controlled and administered Gaza. The lines (not borders) between Jordan, Egypt and Syria and Israel were set out with a green pen in Armistice Agreements – hence the term “green lines” – without prejudice to the rights, claims and positions of either Israel or Jordan.

In 1967, the above areas were retaken by Israeli forces and Jews were again able to live in areas populated by Jews before their expulsion by Jordan in 1948 and Jews again had access to their Holy Places.

It is the return of Jews to the 6.4 km2 of the Old City of Jerusalem, the re-establishment of Jewish populations in Area C of the West Bank and the unification of Jerusalem (some may add Areas A & B as well; this aspect is not the subject of this article) which is generally referred to, as the “Israeli occupation”.

Since 1967, there has been considerable violence between the Palestinians and Israel. Most critics of Israel take the view “The cycle of violence between Israel and the Palestinians is triggered by the dynamics of the Israeli occupation”.

As shown above, there was no “Israeli occupation” between 1948 and 1967. Thus, according to this theme and outlook, since there was no “Israeli occupation”, these were the years of tranquility and Paradise Regained. The EU and the UN demand of Israel to return to the 1949 armistice lines so that peace and calm in the Middle East would be restored and the Israel – Arab conflict be deemed resolved. After all, the atmosphere in the Middle East before 5 June 1967 was idyllic. For the EU and UN, there was actually no good reason in 1967 for the UN to withdraw troops, for the Egyptians to impose a blockade on Eilat and for Egypt and Syria, subsequently joined by Jordan, to threaten Israel. Let`s just restore 4 June 1967 lines and all the “problems” will be resolved. It is really so simple.

Except that it is not.

(Continue to Full Post)

Our European Enemy - by Victor Rosenthal

Are officials in the EU and individual countries that support this project so stupid or blind and deaf as to fail to understand that? Do they not know that the funds that they provide to the Palestinian Authority are used to pay terrorists? Do they not see that UNRWA, of which they are now the prime funder, educates Palestinian children to hate? I don’t believe it.

Victor Rosenthal..
Abu Yehuda..
06 February '20..
Link: http://abuyehuda.com/2020/02/our-european-enemy/


Our state is tiny, in size and population. The Nations didn’t want it to exist at all, and when they couldn’t stop it they did their best to keep it small. There aren’t so many Jews in the world, anyway; millennia of oppression and murder have kept our numbers down, and today there are millions who are “Jewish by extraction” but are assimilated enough to other cultures to be lost forever to the Jewish people.

In all the world there are fewer than 15 million Jews, in Israel fewer than 7 million. But there are forces arrayed against us that are unique in their scope and viciousness. Throughout the world, even in countries where there are few Jews or none at all, people have opinions about us. According to a worldwide survey done by the ADL, some 26% of the world’s 7.5 billion people “harbor antisemitic attitudes.” That is incredible, when you think about it.

There are 35 million Kurds in the world, another people seeking (but so far not getting) self-determination. Certainly they have issues with their Turkish and other neighbors, but I venture to guess that it is highly unlikely that anywhere near as many people have even heard of the Kurds, much less “harbor anti-Kurdish attitudes.”

What’s true for Jews goes triple for their state. I won’t repeat the depressing statistics about the number of UN resolutions condemning Israel that pass every year, and the fact that it is consistently attacked there for crimes that it did not commit while countries that do engage in murder, aggression, and oppression are never mentioned. I won’t go into detail about the extreme and irrational anti-Israel expression (misoziony*) found in almost one hundred percent of the world’s academic and artistic realms.

Really, Israel and Jews are sui generis in the “objects of hatred” department (and if you think it is our fault, you are part of the problem).

This hatred is not just theoretical. From time to time, our immediate neighbors, cousins if you will, start wars whose intent is to kill or disperse the Jews who are occupying the Land of Israel. As a result, Israel has been forced to spend a large portion of her GDP on defense, which has led to her possession of very advanced military technology, which – along with her slightly better degree of organization – led to the defeat of our enemies in conventional war. That in turn led them to adopt strategies of asymmetric warfare and terrorism, which we have managed to counter, although less successfully.

These aren’t our only enemies. In the middle of the twentieth century, one of the most highly developed scientific, literary, and musical cultures in the Western world descended into genocidal madness and ignited a war which resulted in 60 million dead and much of Europe laid waste, primarily – there were other reasons, but I’ll stick with “primarily” – to annihilate us. Largish groups in almost every country of Eastern and Western Europe worked together with the Nazis to help collect, ship, and exterminate those of us who fell into their hands.

After the war there was a general revulsion in what was left of the countries that had participated in the biggest pogrom in history, as well as an understanding on the part of the Jewish remnant that our state had to be established regardless of the cost, which prevailed against the resistance – imagine, after all that! – the resistance from Britain and the Arabs.

But the antisemitism of Europe didn’t go away, although it was pushed under cover by the embarrassment of its involvement in the pogrom of pogroms. There was no embarrassment about expressing it in the form of misoziony, the wild hatred of the state that we managed to establish despite Britain’s best efforts to prevent it. And while there is still enough revulsion left to prevent them from repeating their attempt to liquidate our people, it hasn’t stopped them from paying to create the conditions for others to do it for them.

A Triumph of Clarity: When the Dutch Stopped Funding the PA’s ‘Pay-for-Slay’ - by Maurice Hirsch

The question now, is whether the UK, under the leadership of Boris Johnson or any other prime minister, and the EU will have enough moral fiber and desire to promote peace, to condition their continued aid to the PA on the PA abolishing its “Pay-for-Slay” policy. If they do not, peace will continue to elude the region.

Maurice Hirsch..
TOI Blog..
27 November '19..
Link: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/when-the-dutch-stopped-funding-the-pas-pay-for-slay/

In a demonstration of moral clarity, and setting the continental precedent, Holland just became the first European country to discontinue aid to the Palestinian Authority because of its “Pay-for-Slay” terror reward policy.

Since its creation, the PA has been paying ever increasing salaries to terrorist prisoners and released terrorist prisoners and allowances to wounded terrorists and the families of dead terrorists, including suicide bombers. These payments, have become known as the PA’s “Pay-for-Slay” policy. In 2018 alone, the PA admitted to spending 502 million shekels (over €131 million) on the salaries to the terrorist prisoners and released prisoners and it is estimated that it spent an additional 241 million shekels (€63 million) just on the allowances to the families of the dead terrorists. The salaries and the allowances are paid irrespective of any needs based criteria. Rather they are paid solely as a reward for terrorism.

When the Dutch parliament was originally exposed to the PA’s noxious policy, its first steps were cautious, calling on the government to further investigate. As the unequivocal evidence of the policy grew, the parliament decided to reduce their aid to the PA by a symbolic seven percent – a sum equivalent to the percentage the PA devoted from its entire 2018 budget to its policy. Having further engaged with the PA, and noting the PA’s refusal to cease funding the policy, the Dutch government decided to discontinue all the aid.

The Dutch decision was monumental, not only because it was the first European country to cut all aid to the PA, but rather because the Dutch knew definitively that their aid was not supporting the “Pay-for-Slay” policy. The Dutch were actually supporting the PA judicial system.

Nonetheless, the Dutch reasoning was clear: Why should the Dutch taxpayer subsidize the PA’s legal system, if the PA itself has hundreds of millions of shekels spare to squander, paying substantial financial rewards to terrorists and their families?

* * *

World governments have been acutely aware of the details of the PA’s “Pay-for-Slay” policy since Palestinian Media Watch traveled to the US Congress and many parliaments in Europe to expose new regulations and huge salary increases to terrorist prisoners passed by PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas in 2011.

Despite that knowledge, individual European governments and the European Union have plowed billions of pounds and euros of aid into the PA. According to EU figures, since 2007, over €9 billion of aid has been donated by the EU members to the PA and different Palestinian causes. The European Commission provided €4.8 billion of the aid, Germany contributed over €1 billion and the UK contributed over €724 million.

The ‘Labeling’ of Israel as an unequal player on the world stage - by Melanie Phillips

The European Court of Justice has discriminated against Jews by singling out Israeli businesses from Arab ones. Its ruling is deeply politicized and disreputable, owing everything to boilerplate European prejudice against Israel, and nothing to law and justice.

Melanie Phillips..
JNS.com..
14 November '19..

As Israel came under attack this week with hundreds of rockets raining down from Gaza, and as it steeled itself for even worse, the Israel-bashers were up to their old tricks.

On Tuesday, the European Court of Justice issued its ruling in the Psagot winery case.

It said that the origin of any foodstuffs, such as Psagot wine, made in an Israeli settlement in the “occupied territories” must be described as such. This was to enable consumers to make “ethical considerations and considerations relating to the observance of international law,” which could “influence consumers’ purchasing decisions.”

What’s unethical here is not the behavior of Israel but the ECJ. Singling out Israel like this creates a discriminatory double standard. No other country with a territorial dispute or whose behavior is subject to criticism has its products labeled in this way.

As Eugene Kontorovich, a scholar of international law, tweeted: “Products around the world are made in many situations that raise ‘ethical’ and legal questions, from Chinese prison labor factories to Moroccan drilling Sahrawi oil. Only such concern that requires labeling in E.U. is Jews living in neighborhoods where they are not ‘supposed’ to be.”

Moreover, the court has discriminated against Jews by singling out Israeli businesses from Arab ones. Its ruling is deeply politicized and disreputable, owing everything to boilerplate European prejudice against Israel, and nothing to law and justice.

(Continue to Full Column)

Melanie Phillips, a British journalist, broadcaster and author, writes a weekly column for JNS. Currently a columnist for “The Times of London,” her personal and political memoir, “Guardian Angel,” has been published by Bombardier, which also published her first novel, “The Legacy,” in 2018. Her work can be found at: www.melaniephillips.com.