Israeli intelligence steps up its activity in the U.S. — and gets away with it.

By Philip Giraldi

Israeli government claims that it does not spy on the United States are intended for the media and popular consumption. The reality is that Israel’s intelligence agencies target the United States intensively, particularly in pursuit of military and dual-use civilian technology. Among nations considered to be friendly to Washington, Israel leads all others in its active espionage directed against American companies and the Defense Department. It also dominates two commercial sectors that enable it to extend its reach inside America’s domestic infrastructure: airline and telecommunications security. Israel is believed to have the ability to monitor nearly all phone records originating in the United States, while numerous Israeli air-travel security companies are known to act as the local Mossad stations.

As tensions with Iran increase, sources in the counterintelligence community report that Israeli agents have become more aggressive in targeting Muslims living in the United States as well as in operating against critics. There have been a number of cases reported to the FBI about Mossad officers who have approached leaders in Arab-American communities and have falsely represented themselves as “U.S. intelligence.” Because few Muslims would assist an Israeli, this is done to increase the likelihood that the target will cooperate. It’s referred to as a “false flag” operation.

Mossad officers sought to recruit Arab-Americans as sources willing to inform on their associates and neighbors. The approaches, which took place in New York and New Jersey, were reportedly handled clumsily, making the targets of the operation suspicious. These Arab-Americans turned down the requests for cooperation, and some of the contacts were eventually reported to the FBI, which has determined that at least two of the Mossad officers are, ironically, Israeli Arabs operating out of Israel’s mission to the United Nations in New York under cover as consular assistants.

In another bizarre case, U.S.S. Liberty survivor Phil Tourney was recently accosted in Southern California by a foreigner who eventually identified himself as an Israeli government representative. Tourney was taunted, and the Israeli threatened both him and journalist Mark Glenn, who has been reporting on the Liberty story. Tourney was approached in a hotel lounge, and it is not completely clear how the Israeli was able to identify him. But he knew exactly who Tourney was, as the official referred to the Liberty, saying that the people who had been killed on board had gotten what they deserved. There were a number of witnesses to the incident, including Tourney’s wife. The threat has been reported to the FBI, which is investigating, but Tourney and Glenn believe that the incident is not being taken seriously by the bureau.

FBI sources indicate that the increase in Mossad activity is a major problem, particularly when Israelis are posing as U.S. government officials, but they also note that there is little they can do to stop it as the Justice Department refuses to initiate any punitive action or prosecutions of the Mossad officers who have been identified as involved in the illegal activity.

In another ongoing Israeli spy case, Stewart Nozette appears to be headed towards eventual freedom as his case drags on through the District of Columbia courts. Nozette, an aerospace scientist with a top secret clearance and access to highly sensitive information, offered to sell classified material to a man he believed to be a Mossad officer, but who instead turned out to be with the FBI. Nozette has been in jail since October, but he has now been granted an additional 90-day delay so his lawyers can review the documents in the government’s case, many of which are classified. If Nozette demands that sensitive information be used in his defense, his case will likely follow the pattern set in the nine-times-postponed trial of AIPAC spies Steve Rosen and, who were ultimately acquitted in April 2009 when prosecutors determined that they could not make their case without doing significant damage to national security. A month after Rosen and Weissman were freed, Ben-Ami Kadish, who admitted to providing defense secrets to Israel while working as an engineer at Picatinny Arsenal in New Jersey, walked out of a Manhattan court after paying a fine. He did no jail time and continues to receive his substantial Defense Department pension.

The mainstream media reported the Rosen and Weissman trial intermittently, but there was virtually no coverage of Ben-Ami Kadish, and there has been even less of Nozette. Compare that with the recent reporting on the Russian spies who, by all accounts, did almost nothing and never obtained any classified information. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that spying for Israel is consequence free.

Source: The American Conservative via My Catbirdseat

Leaked CIA memo cites U.S. Jews among exporters of terrorism

Wikileaks releases a CIA memo titled 'What if Foreigners See the United States as an Exporter of Terrorism?' in which American Jews in Israel was one of four groups mentioned.

By Haaretz Service

The Wikileaks website released a CIA document on Wednesday that examines the trend of Americans committing terrorist acts overseas, including American Jews in Israel.

American Jews in Israel were one of four groups mentioned in the classified report, titled "What if Foreigners See the United States as an Exporter of Terrorism?"

"Some American Jews have supported and even engaged in violent acts against perceived enemies of Israel," the report reads. "In 1994, Baruch Goldstein, an American Jewish doctor from New York, emigrated to Israel, joined the extremist group Kach, and killed 29 Palestinians during their prayers in the mosque at the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron which helped trigger a wave of bus bombings by Hamas in early 1995."

Other groups mentioned were Irish-Americans who supported the Irish Republican Army; a group of Muslim-American men who traveled to Pakistan last year to engage in Jihad; and a Pakistani-American man, David Headley, who conducted surveillance for the Lashkar-i-Tayyiba terrorist group ahead of the attack in Mumbai, India in November 2008 that killed more than 160 people.

The leaked report was compiled in February 2010 by the CIA's Red Cell, which, according to the memorandum, was tasked with "taking a pronounced 'out-of-the-box' approach that will provoke thought and offer an alternative viewpoint on the full range of analytic issues."

Wikileaks, an online whistle-blowing website, recently published tens of thousands of classified military documents related to the U.S. war in Afghanistan.

Source:

Will Israel really attack Iran within a year?

After interviewing dozens of Israeli, American and Arab officials, Atlantic Magazine correspondent concludes Israel may not even ask for American 'green light' to attack Iran nuclear sites.

By Natasha Mozgovaya

Israel might attack Iranian nuclear sites within a year, if Iran stays the current course and the U.S. administration doesn't succeed in persuading Israel's leadership that U.S. President Barack Obama is ready to stop Iran by force if necessary, so argues Jeffrey Goldberg in Atlantic magazine's September cover story, obtained by Haaretz ahead of publication.

Based on dozens of interviews the Atlantic correspondent conducted in recent months with Israeli, American and Arab officials, Goldberg came to the conclusion that the likelihood of an Israeli strike has crossed the 50 percent mark. And Israel might not even ask for the famous "green light" from the U.S. - or even give couple of false pre-attack alerts, so that Washington won't try to stop the unilateral operation.

"…one day next spring, the Israeli national-security adviser, Uzi Arad, and the Israeli defense minister, Ehud Barak, will simultaneously telephone their counterparts at the White House and the Pentagon, to inform them that their prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has just ordered roughly one hundred F-15Es, F-16Is, F-16Cs, and other aircraft of the Israeli air force to fly east toward Iran - possibly by crossing Saudi Arabia, possibly by threading the border between Syria and Turkey, and possibly by traveling directly through Iraq's airspace, though it is crowded with American aircraft…," Goldberg paints a possible scenario.

The repercussions of such a strike, which could include the bombing of the Iranian facilities in Natanz, Qom, Esfahan, and maybe even the Russian-built reactor in Bushehr, are less than clear, despite the endless discussions and several simulations. American experts speculate that attacking Iran's nuclear facilities will only slightly delay the nuclear program, whereas some Israelis, according to Goldberg, are a bit more optimistic, in light of the successful Israeli operations against Iraqi and Syrian reactors in the past.

The results might be dire: It's likely that the Israeli air force won't have much time to waste in Iran, as Hezbollah will probably retaliate against Israel in the North and the fighter jets will be needed there. The unilateral operation might throw relations between Jerusalem and Washington into an unprecedented crisis, and might even unleash full-scale regional war with possible economic repercussions for the whole world, not to mention the cost of human lives.

The timetable in this issue is an evasive one - the red lines were pushed back again and again, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told New York Times reporters this week: "Based on my conversations with allies, it's not so much the timing of when or how the Iranians might pursue the nuclear weapons, it's whether they do so. And so whether it would take six months, a year, or five years, it's that deep concern about Iran acquiring nuclear weapons that is the preoccupation of our friends and partners. And we would be pursuing the path we're pursuing regardless of any issue of timing because we think it's got the best potential for changing Iranian behavior."

According to Goldberg, for Israel the red lines are clear. The end of December is Netanyahu's deadline to estimate the success of "non-military methods to stop Iran."

And while Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, reminded Goldberg that "the expression 'All options are on the table' means that all options are on the table," - the Israeli interviewees repeatedly questioned Obama's resolve to actually do it. Some even asked Goldberg if he thought the American president was actually an anti-Semite, forcing the reporter to explain that Obama is probably "the first Jewish President" – but not necessarily Likud's idea of a Jew.

But the reply he got from one official was: "This is the problem. If he is a J Street Jew, we are in trouble."

Ben Rhodes, a deputy national security adviser, stressed that "This president has shown again and again that when he believes it is necessary to use force to protect American national security interests, he has done so" - but the Israeli government might need stronger assurances.

Israel is trying to convey the message not only through the official channels - Israeli military intelligence chief Major General Amos Yadlin visited Chicago recently to meet with the billionaire Lester Crown, one of Obama’s supporters, and asked to him to convey Israel's concerns to the American President, Goldberg reports.

"If the choice is between allowing Iran to go nuclear, or trying for ourselves what Obama won't try, then we probably have to try,” one senior Israeli official told Goldberg. Basically, the Israeli military officials agreed that it would be tough for Israel to do it alone – but on the other hand, the conclusion is Netanyahu might well risk this operation and alienation of his closest ally if he becomes convinced Iran's nuclear bomb "represents a threat like a Shoah."

Goldberg delves into Netanyahu’s relations with his father – the historical lessons he learned from Ben-Zion Netanyahu – and his eagerness not to disappoint him. He also offers a long list of Iran's verbal hostilities toward Israel to remind his readers that Israel is not personally obsessed with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.


"I once asked Ali Asghar Soltanieh, a leading Iranian diplomat who is now Iran’s ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency, why the leadership of Iran persistently described Israel not as a mere regional malefactor but as a kind of infectious disease. 'Do you disagree?' he asked. 'Do you not see that this is true?'" Goldberg writes.


A recent poll conducted in six Arab countries showed a shift of opinion in favor of the Iranian nuclear weapon – views that the Arab leadership clearly doesn’t share with the street.

For Netanyahu, it's clear the bomb will not only strengthen Iran's proxies, but will undermine Israel’s status as a safe haven for Jews, embolden terrorists all over the word, and make the Arab countries more reluctant to make peace with Israel.

According to Goldberg, all the Arab officials he spoke to didn’t think that the U.S. administration truly understood Iran's ambitions. “The best way to avoid striking Iran is to make Iran think that the U.S. is about to strike Iran. We have to know the president’s intentions on this matter. We are his allies," one Arab minister told Goldberg.

Dennis Ross, special adviser to the U.S. president, told the Atlantic that imposing sanctions on Iran could work, despite Israeli doubts, because the Iranian government already faces public alienation. "They are looking at the costs of trying to maintain control over a disaffected public. They wanted to head off sanctions because they knew that sanctions would be a problem. There is real potential here to affect their calculus. We’re pursuing a path right now that has some potential."

Last week, Obama unexpectedly joined a White House briefing for a small group of senior reporters in Washington, raising questions whether he intended to convey some new message to Iran or hint at some new initiative. The accounts of the meetings were somewhat different, and the final impression was that there still is no answer for the question, what President Obama is ready to do if sanctions fail.

David Sanger, the New York Times reporter, heard from the White House sources that during his latest visit to Washington Netanyahu didn't list Iran as one of his top agenda items "whereas at the previous meetings when he has come here, [Iran] was the number one, two, and three issue," on the agenda, which might indicate that Netanyahu got some clear reassurances from the U.S. administration.

Source:

ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL.......PRINT SUCCESS!!! BRAVO~~

Col. Ann Wright spoke in Albuquerque last week. Several days later, a reporter interviewed the Israeli mouthpiece for the region, Asher Yarden, consul general of Israel to the Southwest and never asked him a single probing question. One of Free Gaza's long time supporters, Miriam Adams, wrote me outraged over the accusations in the article. She suggested I write a short oped in response to Yarden's lies, one of them so outrageous, stating that they had video tapes of martyr statements from two of the men they murdered. These 'alleged' tapes were in Turkey.

Between my writing and Miriam's writing, we got the piece published today. More importantly are her comments to me below. If you are discouraged or you think they aren't out their listening, they are. The information is below in the link. If any of you want to write and thank the Albuquerque Journal for printing the oped, please do. They need to hear from us.

Greta

On sat. Aug. 7, 2010 at 6:13 PM, madams12 madams12@earthlink.net wrote:

Dear Greta,
Success!!!!....your OpEd piece WAS published....given Front and Center placement on rightside Editorial page with very large headline above and Cartoon to its Right....thus prominently placed in today's (Sat) paper....all thanks to you!! thank you for taking time to ensure that these guys WOULD respect your affiliation with FGM and thus your words, since they rarely if EVER publish local Ltr to Ed from me or others....This is nothing less than a rousing success for GAZA!!...many thanks/blessings/salaams/hugs, Miriam.

The followinng cartoon was published next to Greta's superb OpEd in today's paper however the Albq Journal doesn't 'allow' syndicated cartoons to viewed on their website. (this image can be found on http://www.intoon.com/#86655 Mike Keefe cartoons in case you cannot see the image)...

Printed from ABQjournal.com, A service of the Albuquerque Journel.

URL: http://www.abqjournal.com/opinion/guest_columns/07233216opinion08-07-10.htm

Saturday, August 07, 2010

Israeli Consul Spins Attack on Flotilla

By Greta Berlin

Co-founder, Free Gaza Movement

Once again, Israel commits war crimes against a civilian population on board six ships in international waters then whines that it is the victim of a PR smear.

Journal Staff Writer Lloyd Jojola's interview with Asher Yarden, consul general of Israel to the Southwest, proves they think they can spin the story of piracy at sea to sympathetic journalists who will ask no probing questions, but merely spout back what the apologists say.

So let's look at the facts instead of Israel's spin.

1. We were in international waters, 65 miles off the coast of Israel on our way to deliver supplies to the people of Gaza that Israel refuses to allow into Gaza.

2. The people on board all six boats were attacked by Israeli terrorists, not just the Mavi Marmara.

3. International law says Israel's siege on 1.5 million Palestinians is illegal, and that is the main reason we were sailing, to break Israel's illegal blockade.

4. As members of civil society, we have the right to hold Israel accountable for war crimes and crimes against humanity since governments refuse to stand up to Israeli illegal actions, and

5. We have the right to self defense if attacked, defending our friends, families and boats.

We faced a highly armed militia that deliberately attacked us in the early morning hours. Their commandos murdered us, beat us, dragged us into a port where we had no intention of going, deprived us of lawyers for hours, stole all of our equipment and tapes, lied about the audiotapes they issued, and are now lying about some so-called video tapes made in Turkey. The men who were killed ranged between 33-61 with one American Turkish young man of 19 who wanted to be a doctor who was shot five times in the head and back. There are autopsy reports available ... and there are descriptions of who they were, why they were going and how many times they were shot on our website at http://www.freegaza.org/.

Your reporter never asked the tough questions of this Israeli mouthpiece.

Why didn't the Navy wait until morning? Why did they attack a civilian caravan in international waters? Why did they murder nine men with 31 bullets, many to the head? Why did they maim and wound people on board the other boats, several of them beaten so badly they had broken bones?

Why not ask for the truth instead of Israel's spin? Why believe this man, Asher Yarden, when people can hear the testimony of those passengers who were on board, many of them threatened with bodily harm?...

Who are you going to believe? A decorated U.S. war veteran, Ann Wright, who participated in the flotilla and recently spoke in Albuquerque, as reported in the Journal, or a mouthpiece for Israel?


Greta Berlin, Co-Founder
+33 607 374 512
witnessgaza.com
http://www.freegaza.org/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/freegaza

I have added my name to the list for the U.S. Boat To Gaza

Yesterday I had my name put on the list in hopes that when it comes time to fill out the application that I will be accepted to be on the U.S. Boat to Gaza. The siege and the occupation has to stop. Israel has come to a time that they have to make the choice of peace or continue their ways and find themselves alone in the world. Only they can save themselves from destruction. I have not forgot about the USS Liberty. To attack the U.S. Boat to Gaza will not set well with Americans as the USS Liberty is still a sore spot with us. May God (Allah) Speed and protect this Humanitarian act by the U.S. Boat to Gaza.

Chet

Israel 'blocks' Jordan nuclear bid, King Abdullah says

Israel continues to make more enemies.

 

King Abdullah has accused Israel of trying to block Jordan from developing a peaceful nuclear programme.

He said Israel had been pressuring states like France and South Korea not to sell Jordan nuclear technology.

Israel, believed to be the only country in the Middle East that has nuclear weapons, has denied the accusation.

High oil prices are pushing countries to consider nuclear energy, but the spread of the technology increases the risk of proliferation, analysts say.

'Underhanded'

In a lengthy interview in The Wall Street Journal, King Abdullah strongly criticised Israel for what he said were its efforts to persuade potential suppliers to abandon plans to sell Jordan nuclear power generating reactors, something Israel denies.

He said Israel's "underhanded" actions have helped bring Jordan-Israeli relations to their lowest point since a 1994 peace agreement.

"There are countries, Israel in particular, that are more worried about us being economically independent than the issue of nuclear energy," King Abdullah said. "There are many such reactors in the world and a lot more coming, so [the Israelis must] go mind their own business."

Jordan, with US backing, is determined to develop nuclear power to escape from its near total dependence upon imported oil.

It hopes that nuclear energy will provide up to 30% of its power needs by 2030.

The desert kingdom recently short-listed a French-Japanese consortium, as well a Canadian and a Russian company, to build its first nuclear plant, due to be operational by 2019.

The Obama administration, while supportive of Jordan's nuclear ambitions, is worried that the spread of nuclear power could open the door to the proliferation of nuclear weapons, the BBC's diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus reports.

So Washington wants to secure a nuclear agreement with Jordan under which the country would surrender its right to manufacture its own uranium fuel, our correspondent says.

That could prove a major sticking point between these two long-time allies, he adds.

Source:

Indyk: If Israel manages alone, it can decide alone

By Haaretz Service

Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Martin Indyk said on Wednesday that if Israel is a superpower that manages alone, then it can make decisions alone.

In an interview with Army Radio, Indyk said that if Israel sees itself as a superpower that does not need any aid from the United States, then it can make its own decisions. However "if you need the United States, then you need to take into account America's interests," said Indyk.

Indyk, who is currently the vice president and director of Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution, and also serves as an adviser to Mideast envoy George Mitchell, emphasized these interests in a New York Times op-ed published on Monday.

"This is no longer just about helping a special ally resolve a debilitating problem. With 200,000 American troops committed to two wars in the greater Middle East and the U.S. president leading a major international effort to block Iran's nuclear program, resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has become a U.S. strategic imperative," wrote Indyk.

"Given Israel's dependence on the United States to counter the threat from Iran and to prevent its own international isolation, an Israeli prime minister would surely want to bridge the growing divide. Yet the shift in American perceptions seems to have gone unnoticed in Jerusalem," he continued.

Speaking to Army Radio, Indyk also said that Israel's main problem isn't Interior Minister Eli Yishai or Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, but rather the issue lies within the Likud party.

"The shift in America's Middle East interests means that Netanyahu must make a choice: Take on the president of the United States, or take on his right wing. If he continues to defer to those ministers in his cabinet who oppose peacemaking, the consequences for US-Israel relations could be dire," wrote Indyk in the New York Times article.

Source:

U.S. lawmakers to Obama: Press Israel to ease Gaza siege

Fifty-four members of the U.S. Congress have signed a letter asking President Barack Obama to put pressure on Israel to ease the siege of the Gaza Strip.

The letter was the initiative of Representatives Jim McDermott from Washington and Keith Ellison from Minnesota, both of whom are Democrats. Ellison is the first American Muslim to ever win election to Congress.

McDermott and Ellison wrote that they understand the threats facing Israel and the ongoing Hamas terror activities against Israeli citizens but that "this concern must be addressed without resulting in the de facto collective punishment of the Palestinian residents of the Gaza Strip."

"We ask you to press for immediate relief for the citizens of Gaza as an urgent component of your broader Middle East peace efforts," they wrote, adding that the siege has hampered the ability of aid agencies to do their work in Gaza.

The congressmen urged Obama to pressure Israel to ease the movement of people into and out of Gaza, especially students, the sick, aid workers, journalists and those with family concerns, and also to allow the import of building materials to rebuild houses. Israel has warned that such materials would be used to rebuild Hamas infrastructure and not civilian homes.

Ellison has harshly criticized the House of Representatives decision to reject the Goldstone report, arguing that the report "only presents facts and raises recommendations for the future." He cast doubt that members of Congress who voted to reject the report even took the time to read it and that the rejection hurt the Obama government's role as an honest broker in the Middle East conflict.

In addition to members of Congress, several leftist organizations also signed the letter, including Americans for Peace Now and J Street.

The Israeli Embassy in Washington responded to the letter: "The Israeli position is that the Hamas government in Gaza does not meet the conditions set forth by the international community and the Quartet. And as long as Hamas continues to attack Israel with missiles and other means, Israel will not open the border crossings. With this, Israel is doing everything possible to ensure that humanitarian aid enters Gaza in a controlled manner so that it is ensured that the population receives what it needs, including medical care in Israel. But Israel will not allow a neighbor that calls for its destruction to enjoy the benefits of an open border."

Also, a letter signed by 33 members of Congress was sent to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to raise the issue with Israel of students from Gaza who are having difficulty studying at universities in the West Bank due to the lack of free passage between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

"Ensuring that students from Gaza have access to higher education in the West Bank promotes U.S. foreign policy interests by investing in the future of the region," the letter states.

The State Department responded to the letter: "Education is a fundamental right and a force for moderation. The Secretary responds to all Congressional correspondence as appropriate."

Source:

Obama blowing threatening winds at Israel

Barack Obama at the White House on Friday. To what extent can he use U.S.-Israel loan guarantees to influence Netanyahu's policy?

We can deny it all we like, but if it looks like a threat and sounds like a threat, then it's a threat.

U.S. special envoy George Mitchell, who is coming to Israel next week, suggested in an interview with the U.S. public television network PBS that Washington might withhold loan guarantees to Israel.

When this was interpreted as a hint meant to pressure Israel, "clarifications" poured forth from the American capital. Mitchell wasn't threatening, he was only giving a hypothetical response to the interviewer's question about the options for pressure that were available to the administration. The White House itself sent a message to the effect of, "We didn't want to threaten, only to speed up the negotiations."

The precise words and their precise meaning do not matter. The reality is that President Barack Obama is frustrated and that threatening winds are blowing from the White House toward Israel. There is a big gap between Obama's peace speeches and his Nobel Peace Prize on one hand and his inability to produce a tangible achievement on the other. And while he speaks about peace and reconciliation, he himself is sending 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan as their fallen comrades' coffins continue to arrive back in the U.S. The question is whether they knew what they gave their lives for.

Recent talk about the Obama administration being "tired" of Israel is undoubtedly an expression of frustration with the fact that the quarter from which the Americans had expected the most has so far yielded nothing.

The threat of withholding loan guarantees recalls the commander of the British forces during the British Mandate, General Evelyn Hugh Barker, who ordered the Jews punished by "striking at their pockets." This approach did not keep the organized Jewish community from driving out the British and founding an independent state. Come what may, one thing is clear - U.S. military aid and its support of Israel in the UN Security Council will not be impaired under any circumstances.

In light of the Iranian threat we should remember how important it is to Obama to cooperate with the moderate Muslim states and to see a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in order to prevent another war from breaking out in the region.

Our grumbling that Obama is pro-Arab is not fair. Perhaps he doesn't admire us like some of his predecessors, but his policy does not deviate by one millimeter from theirs. The United States has never recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Succeeding administrations have consistently adhered to the demand for a return to the 1967 borders, with minor border adjustments related to security. They have also consistently objected to the settlements and have warned us many a time that they would not finance any settlement evacuations.

Mitchell is coming to the region to take the negotiations out of the freezer. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may have made a commitment to a peace process based on two states for two peoples, but so far he has done nothing except to declare a freeze in construction in the settlements for 10 months and not a single day beyond. What that means exactly is not clear. It's neither an evacuation nor proof that the government wants and is capable of evacuating tens of thousands of settlers. As in "Saving Private Ryan," Washington, Cairo and Amman are working together to save Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak is in deep now with his construction of a separation fence between his country and the Gaza Strip, which is deeply damaging to the status and power of Hamas. At a time like this Israel cannot make do with "freezing construction for 10 months." It sounds like a joke.

Mitchell's visit is extremely important for renewing the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. He may bring with him a plan that Israel will not be able to say no to without damaging American interests. According to one knowledgeable source Jerusalem is preparing efforts to resume the talks and understands that the government is bound to them. After all, it was Netanyahu's government that drafted the two-states-for-two-peoples promissory note.

In the current domestic political situation Netanyahu could obtain the broadest parliamentary support in Israel's history - almost 80 Knesset members will support beginning vigorous negotiations aimed at reaching a settlement and drawing permanent borders, with the active involvement and assistance of the United States.

Enough already with the shticks and the tricks, it's time to show leadership.

Source:

Finance Minister: We don't need U.S. loan guarantees

Israeli officials were up in arms Sunday after Washington's special envoy to the Mideast suggested the U.S. might impose sanctions on Israel and withhold loan guarantees to press it to make concessions in negotiations with the Palestinians, with Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz saying that Israel was "doing just fine" without American loan guarantees.
"We don't need to use these guarantees," Israeli media quoted Steinitz as saying. "We are doing just fine. But several months ago we agreed with the American treasury on guarantees for 2010 and 2011, and there were no conditions."

The finance minister added that Israel was making every effort to advance peace talks with the Palestinians.

Talks broke down a year ago and have not resumed because the Palestinians insist that Israel first halt all construction on disputed lands they want for a future state. Israel says the Palestinians should return to the negotiating table without conditions.

U.S. envoy George Mitchell, when asked in a television interview last week what sort of pressure could be applied to Israel, replied that "under American law, the United States can withhold support on loan guarantees to Israel."

Mitchell told PBS interviewer Charlie Rose that George W. Bush's administration had done so in the past. But he quickly added that he preferred persuasion to sanctions.

Education Minister Gideon Sa'ar also addressed Mitchell's remark, saying at the weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday that Israel will always act in accordance with its own needs, and not yield to external pressure. "The American administration knows that those who are holding up the negotiations are the Palestinians. Israel made many concessions while the Palestinians didn't do a thing."

Environment Protection Minister Gilad Erdan said he didn't think that there was anyone in the Israeli government who really believed that the U.S. really intends to withhold guarantees. "Israel's economy is pretty strong, and the threat wouldn't be appropriate," he said.

Under the Bush administration, Israel received billions of dollars in guarantees, which are U.S.-backed loans with favorable interest rates. In 2003, the U.S. whittled down the guarantees after Israel built part of its separation barrier inside the West Bank rather than completely along it on the Israeli side.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office issued a statement in response to Mitchell's comments, pinning the blame for the negotiations logjam on the Palestinians.

"Everyone realizes that the Palestinian Authority refuses to renew peace talks, while Israel took significant steps to advance the process," the statement said.

In late November, Netanyahu announced a temporary construction freeze in West Bank settlements. The 10-month freeze does not apply to East Jerusalem, where the Palestinians hope to establish a future capital.

Israel captured East Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan in 1967. The Palestinians and the international community consider Israeli construction in both areas to be settlement activity.

The Palestinians so far have rebuffed U.S. pressure to abandon their demand for a total construction freeze in both areas. They also want talks to resume where they left off under Netanyahu's predecessor, Ehud Olmert, who proposed sharing Jerusalem and ceding wide swaths of the West Bank to a future Palestinian state.

Israel says it has no preconditions for talks and is willing to immediately discuss all outstanding issues. But Netanyahu has said repeatedly that Israel does not intend to share Jerusalem and historically he has opposed giving up all the West Bank land the Palestinians claim.

The Palestinians say such positions offer little common ground for talks to succeed.

On Friday, the Obama administration laid out a major shift in its Mideast peace strategy, suggesting both sides move past this impasse by tackling defining borders for a Palestinian state and the status of Jerusalem.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said that dealing with those matters first would eliminate Palestinian concerns about continued construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

The Palestinians' immediate response was to hold fast to their demand for a complete construction freeze: If Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas retreats now from his demand for a complete settlement freeze, that could further hurt his standing among Palestinians who are increasingly skeptical about peace efforts.

However, if the new U.S. strategy will include support for holding the talks based on 1967 borders, Abbas could present that as a major achievement.

Greater clarity is expected after Mitchell visits Israel and the Palestinian territories later this month. He plans to visit Paris and Brussels first to build support for the approach from European officials.

Source: