Displaying posts published in

July 2018

David Isaac Reviews : ‘Bibi: The Turbulent Life and Times of Benjamin Netanyahu’ By Anshel Pfeffer

http://freebeacon.com/columns/

Biographers typically have an affection for their subjects. Sometimes so much so that they descend into hagiography. No danger of this from Haaretz writer Anshel Pfeffer, an extreme example of the debunking biographer. Typical of his snarky style: Netanyahu “had given up on Israeli journalists being honest enough to present him as the country’s only true leader.”

What is striking about Bibi: The Turbulent Life and Times of Benjamin Netanyahu is the author’s refusal to give Netanyahu credit for nearly anything. Few dispute that as finance minister under Ariel Sharon, Netanyahu made important reforms to Israel’s economy. The ever critical Haaretzadmitted, “He succeeded beyond all expectations. His decisiveness, courage and rectitude in pursuing unpopular but important policies succeeded in stabilizing Israel’s economy.”

Yet even here Pfeffer claims Netanyahu’s impact “has been exaggerated,” with the previous Rabin government deserving the real credit for the investments that led to Israel’s high-tech boom.

In view of Pfeffer’s stubborn adherence to the moribund peace process, it is not surprising that his major criticisms of Netanyahu center on his views and policies in relation to the Arabs. Given Pfeffer’s own bleak view of Israel (he has elsewhere described Israel as “a dysfunctional society fighting an uphill battle—one that it often loses—against racism and corruption”), it is ironic that he repeatedly complains of Netanyahu’s “bleak” view. Pfeffer considers it bleak because of Netanyahu’s common-sense belief that “real peace can only come when the Arabs recognize the Jewish state’s right to exist” and that is unlikely to happen in our lifetimes.

Pfeffer complains that Netanyahu is “dragging his feet” with the peace process, with the only peace he is willing to consider “one where Israel bullies the Palestinians into submission.” Pfeffer blames the failure of the Oslo Accords largely on Israel, dating their collapse to reactionary violence starting with Baruch Goldstein, a religious Jew who killed 29 Muslim worshippers in the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron in December 1994. In so far as he mentions Arab involvement, he blames the terrorism on Hamas. Pfeffer seems utterly blind to Yasser Arafat’s, or now Mahmoud Abbas and the entire Palestinian Arab leadership’s inability to come to terms with Israel as a Jewish state. On May 10, 1994, months before Goldstein’s actions, Arafat famously declared in a Johannesburg mosque that the Oslo Accords were but a tactical step toward Israel’s elimination and called for jihad to liberate Jerusalem.

Hemispatial neglect is a medical syndrome following a stroke, in which the patients behave as if half of their body, indeed half of their world, does not exist. They will eat only from one side of a plate, read only from one side of a book, shave or put makeup only on one side of their face. It’s a remarkable condition. It’s also one that afflicts much of the Israeli journalistic community. Pfeffer, like so many of his colleagues, only sees one side of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It is political hemineglect.

Greece and the Eastern Mediterranean Alliance By John M. Nomikos

https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/greece-israel-cyprus-alliance/

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Eastern Mediterranean Alliance (Israel, Greece, and Cyprus) is emerging at a time of increasing global instability. All three states are firm democracies that promote peace, security, and environmental stability in the region. The tripartite alliance is strategically the most significant anchor of Greek security and economic progress.

Concrete steps over the past three years have set the foundations of an Eastern Mediterranean Alliance (EMA) comprising Israel, Greece, and Cyprus. The convergence of the three nations is the natural outcome of close democratic similarities and a joint desire for stability and progress in a region tormented by perennial Middle East strife, radical Islamism, and the morphing of Turkey into a fundamentalist Islamic autocracy.

The EMA is emerging at a time of increasing global instability. American retrenchment from traditional postwar strategic arrangements, the resurgence of Russia, a troubled EU, the illegal migration crisis, China’s rise as a global power, and much else leave little room for complacency.

Israel, Greece, and the Republic of Cyprus are the only Eastern Mediterranean actors that are firm democracies. As such, they do not only see a common interest in promoting peace, security, and environmental stability in the region, but also seek to promote strong economic bonds following the discovery of rich hydrocarbon deposits in their respective Exclusive Economic Zones.

While each of the EMA partners faces individual challenges, all three are united against the regional spoiler and strutting Islamic “superpower” of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s Turkey. The Turkish president misses no opportunity to vow that Ankara will “take what is rightfully hers” – and is just a step away from declaring the international treaties that settled Turkey’s fate after WWI null and void.

Palestinians’ Latest “Apartheid Fatwa” by Bassam Tawil

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12716/palestinians-apartheid-fatwa

The mufti’s position parallels that of a US Supreme Court judge. If the mufti issues a legal opinion or religious decree, his people and leaders are expected to abide by it.

With the new fatwa, Abbas can go to President Trump and other world leaders and tell them, “I would truly like to make peace with the Jews; however, I am prevented from doing so by this fatwa, which bans Muslims from doing real estate transactions with Jews. Sorry!”

One can only imagine the response of the international community had the Chief Rabbi of Israel issued a decree banning Jews from doing business with Muslims. But in the instance of the Palestinian mufti and his superiors in Ramallah, everything seems to be fine — once again, the international community turns a blind eye to the Palestinian leaders’ apartheid and their terrorizing of their own people.

If anyone wanted further proof that no Palestinian leader would ever be able to recognize Israel’s right to exist, it was provided recently in the form of yet another religious decree, or fatwa, issued by the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Sheikh Mohammed Hussein. It is a fatwa that basically tells Muslims: “We will kill you, punish you in many ways, if we catch you selling land or homes to Jews.”

The fatwa makes it clear that no Muslim is entitled to sell his or her land — or transfer ownership over it — to “enemies,” a reference to Jews. The implications are extremely serious. Anyone who violates this religious opinion or decree will face various forms of punishment, ranging from being boycotted to the death sentence.

The fatwa, which was published by the mufti on July 10, has attracted no attention from the international media or those parties that keep telling us how keen they are about achieving peace between Palestinians and Israel. Human rights organizations around the world do not seem to be bothered at all by such threats against Muslims.

According to the fatwa, it is considered a “betrayal of Allah, His Messenger and Islam” to sell land to the “enemies” or accept compensation for it. The Muslims, it states, are obligated to boycott anyone who violates the ruling, refrain from marrying the “sinners” or doing any business with them. Taking matters to their most extreme, Muslims are prohibited from attending the funeral of — or even burying in a Muslim cemetery — anyone who dares to sell land or a house to a Jew.

Is Russia “Buying” the West? by Peter Huessy

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12715/russia-czech-republic

It is wrong to view Russia’s political warfare as merely a kind of “competition” that lacks the seriousness of an actual military confrontation. As the Center for Strategic and Budget Assessments (CSBA) report — detailing Russia’s political warfare — indicates, politics is war by other means.

Since then, however, the Czech Republic seems to be moving in the opposite direction, with an openly pro-Russian leader, President Milos Zeman. As one colleague of mine put it: “Could the land of the Velvet Revolution be slowly falling under the spell of Putin’s propaganda?”

Jakub Janda, director of the European Values Think-Tank in Prague, worries that one measure of the success of Russian propaganda is that four out of ten Czechs blame the U.S. for the Ukrainian crisis, although there are Russian troops occupying part of the territory of Ukraine. And only 20% of Czechs believe that Russian-organized troops are not operating in Ukraine, a view held by President Zeman.

That countries with such promise as the Czech Republic are possibly sacrificing all that they gained after the end of the Cold War for the Russian government is a sad commentary on the condition of European societies. The good news is that there are brave elements within these societies who seek to push back and reclaim their freedom and sovereignty. Their efforts deserve not only our praise, but our full support.

With the collapse of the Warsaw Pact and the official dissolution of the Soviet Union in December 1991, NATO assumed that the newly freed countries of Eastern and Central Europe (commonly referred to as the ECE) would join with Western Europe and become both free and prosperous. It was not an entirely reasonable assumption, however: the Russians did not want to accept the end of the Soviet empire; nor were they ready to jettison decades of deep suspicion about the aims of the West, particularly the United States and NATO.

Although the Russians sought economic influence throughout Eastern Europe after the end of the Cold War, they were nevertheless supportive of Russian President Mikhail Gorbachev’s full acceptance of the reunification of Germany and independence for the former members of the Soviet bloc.

Ethiopia’s New Direction Can a new prime minister finally offer a better life to his people? Joseph Puder

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270740/ethiopias-new-direction-joseph-puder

Ethiopia recently elected Prime Minister Dr. Abiy Ahmed: a 42-year-old reformer intent on making Africa’s second-largest country the only true democracy on the continent. Last week, Prime Minister Abiy’s trip to Eritrea’s capital city Asmara was promising, signaling a thawing of relations with its arch-enemy following two decades of conflict.

During the historic summit, Abiy and Eritrea’s rebel-turned-dictator Isaias Afwerki agreed to jointly open up shared airspace, to rekindle joint communications, and to re-open embassies. Importantly, Eritrea will now permit Ethiopia to use its port, which became landlocked as a result of Eritrea’s secession from Ethiopia 25-years ago. Ethiopia’s trade capital, Addis Ababa, will finally have access to the Red Sea.

According to Abiy, the two leaders agreed,

To bring down the wall between us. Now there is no border between Ethiopia and Eritrea. That borderline is gone today with the display of a true love…love is greater than modern weapons like tanks and missiles. Love can win hearts, and we have seen a great deal of it today here in Asmara. From this time on, war is not an option for the people of Eritrea and Ethiopia. What we need now is love.

Since his swearing in on April 2, 2018, Abiy has promised to reform Ethiopian governance. During his first speech, Abiy espoused western principles including promoting the idea of Ethipoians’ right to choose their own occupation, supporting protections to ensure human rights, and he extolled the virtues of economic security. But what raised eyebrows was Abiy’s bold invitation to Ethiopian exiles saying, “We will welcome you home,” and promised, “the coming season in Ethiopia is a season of peace and reconciliation.”

Totalitarianism In Durham Government officials attempt to “no-platform” Jordan Peterson. Matthew Vadum

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270763/totalitarianism-durham-matthew-vadum

Leftist city officials in Durham, N.C., are trying to censor conservative academic Jordan B. Peterson by denying him a platform for an upcoming local talk about his bestselling self-help book.

This attack on Peterson is part of a larger assault on conservatives’ free speech rights in the Trump era. Demonstrators have shut down or tried to shut down Charles Murray, Milo Yiannopoulos, Ben Shapiro, Ann Coulter, Mark Levin, and David Horowitz, to name a few targets. Social media companies brazenly discriminate against conservatives and the crimes of former IRS official Lois Lerner against conservative activist groups remain unprosecuted.

Peterson is a former Harvard clinical psychology professor who is scheduled to speak Sept. 10 at the Durham Performing Arts Center (DPAC), which is owned by the City of Durham. Contrary to local media reports, he was not invited to speak by DPAC: he rented the venue.

The date is part of a speaking tour to promote his acclaimed self-help book, 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos. Durham won’t be Peterson’s first appearance in an intellectually hostile left-wing urban center in the U.S. Now a professor at the University of Toronto in Canada, he has already spoken in New York City, Boston, Philadelphia, Austin, Texas, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, and Portland, Ore.

Peterson’s talk on “Identity Politics and the Marxist Lie of White Privilege” at a conference held last fall in Washington, D.C., helped to bring his message to a new audience and may have played a role in his meteoric rise.

The radical office-holders in charge in Durham are terrified of Peterson, what he represents, and what he might say on their turf.

Perhaps for good reason.

If you have any doubt what is motivating this fear among left-wingers, just watch Peterson’s merciless, masterful dismantling of UK’s Channel 4 reporter Cathy Newman’s tired old feminist and leftist talking points. Peterson is utterly fearless, always amply armed with facts, and intellectually intimidating.

An American President In London The real reason why the British establishment can’t handle Trump. Bruce Bawer

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270760/american-president-london-bruce-bawer

In the U.S. we’ve always prided ourselves on being a society without classes. Yes, we always had rich and poor, and back in the day we even had slaves and masters – and, yes, after that was over we had monstrous racism, plus no small amount of prejudice directed by natives toward newly arrived immigrant groups, not to mention tension among many of those groups. But however unpleasant those tensions, they were generally mild compared to the kind of tribal hatreds that could found almost everywhere else in the world. Moreover, these problems tended to fade rapidly, so that the grandchildren of people who had warred viciously with one another back in the Old Country could sit side by side in American classrooms without ever giving a thought to their respective family backgrounds.

Furthermore, America has always been overwhelmingly middle class, and has always been characterized by a remarkable degree of social mobility. The poor could become weathy. Foreigners could become Americans. Some of the most accomplished and esteemed Americans, indeed, first came to its shores as children of the wretched and tempest-tost. The genius of America was that you could re-create yourself, invent yourself. The classic American hero was always the self-made man – the rags-to-riches Horatio Alger protagonist. Nothing has ever been less American than condescending to a fellow who put in a hard day’s work, kept his nose clean, and took care of his family.

That universal American respect for the responsible solid citizen, however, has disappeared. Its demise was brought about by the rise of a politically lockstep American cultural elite – an elite made up of business, media, and high-culture types in New York, Internet magnates in Silicon Valley, show-business notables in Los Angeles, the great and powerful in Washington, and academics at universities across the country, all of whom share a deep and unprecedented contempt for millions of their fellow Americans. If we can’t let go of Hillary’s word “deplorables,” it’s because it perfectly sums up the profoundly un-American attitude toward ordinary working Americans that defines and unifies our cultural elite.

Trump and Putin Meet in Helsinki The dire importance of what our president is trying to achieve. Joseph Klein

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270767/trump-and-putin-meet-helsinki-joseph-klein

President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin held their first summit meeting Monday in Helsinki, Finland. The meeting took place just days after Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had announced indictments against 12 Russian military intelligence officers for allegedly hacking the computer systems of the Democratic National Committee and of Hillary Clinton’s election campaign during the 2016 election campaign. Some Democrats and media pundits wanted President Trump to cancel the meeting in the wake of the indictments, or at least to place the election meddling issue front and center of their discussions before any other issue. Reporters’ questions at the joint press conference following the meeting focused primarily on the election meddling issue. Critical security threats to the world, such as Iran and Syria, Islamic terrorism, and nuclear proliferation, are evidently of much lesser concern to President Trump’s critics.

In his opening remarks before the one-on-one meeting, President Trump noted the deteriorating state of U.S.-Russian relations and emphasized the importance of dialogue between the two countries’ leaders. “I think we have great opportunities together as two countries that frankly we have not been getting along well for the last number of years,” President Trump said. “I really think the world wants to see us get along.” The Russian president said that “the time has come to have a thorough discussion on various international problems and sensitive issues. There are quite a few of them for us to pay attention to.” Both presidents ignored reporters’ shouted questions regarding the issue of Russian election meddling.

The private meeting between the two leaders lasted more than two hours, longer than originally scheduled, followed by a luncheon session that included top aides on both sides. Then President Trump and President Putin conducted a joint press conference.

Diplomacy 101 Versus Politics Writ Small By Angelo Codevilla

https://amgreatness.com/2018/07/17/diplomacy-101-vs-politics-writ

The high professional quality of Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin’s performance at their Monday press conference in Helsinki contrasts sharply with the obloquy by which the bipartisan U.S. ruling class showcases its willful incompetence.

Though I voted for Trump, I’ve never been a fan of his and I am not one now. But, having taught diplomacy for many years, I would choose the Trump-Putin press conference as an exemplar of how these things should be done. Both spoke with the frankness and specificity of serious business. This performance rates an A+.

Both presidents started with the basic truth.

Putin: The Cold War is ancient history. Nobody in Russia (putting himself in this category) wants that kind of enmity again. It is best for Russia, for America, and for everybody else if the two find areas of agreement or forbearance.

Trump: Relations between the globe’s major nuclear powers have never been this bad—especially since some Americans are exacerbating existing international differences for domestic partisan gain. For the sake of peace and adjustment of differences where those exist and adjustment is possible, Trump is willing to pay a political cost to improve those relations (if, indeed further enraging his enemies is a cost rather than a benefit).

In short, this was a classic statement of diplomatic positions and a drawing of spheres of influence.

Flexibility and Inflexibility
As Putin listed his agenda, he showed that today’s Russia is a status quo power, whose primary objective is stability. Having come to power over a country diminished and dispirited, he sought to recover as much as possible of what Russia had lost in the Soviet break-up. He forcibly took back parts of Georgia and Ukraine. In doing so, he pushed against open doors.

Today, no other doors are open. Now being ahead, he wants to stop the game. He knows that this is possible because nobody is going to wage or even risk war against Russia to try disgorging Abkhazia and Crimea. He wants Trump to acknowledge that. Warning against extending NATO to Ukraine and Georgia, he signaled that all else is negotiable.

What Critics Missed About the Trump-Putin Summit By Roger Kimball *****

https://amgreatness.com/2018/07/16/what-critics-missed-about-the

When Presidents Trump and Vladimir Putin ended their joint press conference in Helsinki, the punditocracy predictably swarmed all over it like ants around a pile of crumbs. Was Trump winking at Putin? Did he really say he believes Putin more than he believes Robert Mueller about whether Russia interfered in the 2016 election? Former Gus Hall enthusiast John Brennan, off his meds again, tweeted that the presser was “treasonous.” Professional chatterer Anderson Cooper said it was “perhaps one of the most disgraceful performances by an American president at a summit.”

Every phrase, every gesture of the event will be picked apart and second-guessed to death in the next few days. I’ll leave them to the carrion.

Would You Rather Fight?
To my mind, the chief point was enunciated by Winston Churchill in 1954: “Meeting jaw to jaw is better than war.”

As President Trump repeatedly put it during his 2016 campaign, it would be a good thing, not a bad thing, to get along better with Russia. Let me stipulate that I think that Vladimir Putin is a murderous thug. He has demonstrated time and again that while you can take the lout out of the KGB, it’s much more difficult to take the KGB out of the lout.

That said, Russia is a world power that commands an enormous nuclear arsenal. Which means we cannot—or at least we should not—simply take our marbles out of the game and go home in a snit because they do things of which we do not approve.

As Trump and Putin both frankly acknowledged, there are issues on which they diverge—the fate of Crimea may lead the list—but there are also many areas in which our national interests intersect. It is a mark of the realistic and far-seeing diplomat to seize and build upon the latter while trying to find common ground about the former. This is what both men are trying to do.

Big If’s
I think there are essentially two takeaways from this historic event in Helsinki. The first is that Donald Trump is a bold, risk-taking statesman whose demotic style of delivery prevents many from appreciating the beneficently radical nature of his diplomacy. Maybe he will wind up being played by Kim Jong-un. But maybe his astonishing meeting with the tubby tyrant in Singapore is the beginning of the normalization of North Korea. If that happens—and I acknowledge that history suggests it is a big “if”—then President Trump will have achieved a world-historical diplomatic victory. His willingness to meet “jaw to jaw” would then be seen as a gambit of genius.

Maybe Putin is running circles around a gullible Trump. But maybe it is a real, as distinct from an Obama-Clinton merely rhetorical, reset. Then that, too, will be seen as a masterly and peace-enhancing initiative.