Israel must use the 'opportunity' provided by the Arab Spring, says former IDF chief-designate

Maj. Gen. Yoav Galant remains quiet about his failed appointment as IDF chief and says seven good years of Israel's security are about to end.

Maj. Gen. (ret. ) Yoav Galant spoke about his fears for Israel's security, and about how the country should "market" itself, at conference hosted by The Washington Institute for Near East Policy in Washington on Thursday.On his failed appointment as the Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, Galant has preferred to keep silent, stating only that "one day the full scope of the story will be revealed." But on Friday, as the speaker at the fifth annual Zeev Schiff Memorial Lecture on Middle East Security, he provided his perspective on events shaking the region, and how Israel should deal with them."I believe the Israel Defense Forces is doing a good job", Galant said. "The most prominent and difficult question is how to keep Israel just, and how to market it. I believe we have an opportunity now - after the world was watching [Syrian President Bashar] Assad killing more civilian Arabs than Israel killed in 60 years - we have to use this opportunity. And we need to be more humble, more solid, to pay more respect to other people, to young generations, because good ideas arise from these generations."He also called Assad the last Alawite ruler of Syria, though Galant did not want to predict how long Assad could hold onto power.

In the case of Syria, Galant said, time is not on Israel's side. "It's not working for us in Syria, because the vacuum on the opposition side is going to be filled with radical Muslims, with Al-Qaida involved, the Muslim Brotherhood. In two years, we'll have very extremist people on the other side."

Seven good years of Israel's security are about to end, Galant claimed, as the changes in the Middle East have complicated Israel's situation.

Demographic trends are also undermining the impact of the IDF, he said. Within 10 years, Galant said, there will be 8 million Jews and 8 million non-Jews west of the Jordan, and later on, Jews will be the minority in this area.

He said that the Sinai Bedouin population on Israel's southern border is becoming an outlaw group, marginalized by the central government, but he stressed that this is an internal, domestic issue for Egypt to solve.

Asked what, in his opinion, are minimal defensible borders in the West Bank and how to deal with the settlements, Galant ducked the question.

He stressed that improving the situation for the Palestinians is in Israel's interest. "If the situation will be better on the Palestinian side, we'll get sooner to the solution."

Former Mossad Chief: Arab Spring ‘Incredible Opportunity for Israel"
By : Jewish Press

Former Mossad chief Meir Dagan, speaking at the 2012 Presidential Conference in Jerusalem, expressed cautious optimism about the potential outcomes of the Arab Spring, saying that “we are in a very unique position that has never been seen before.”Dagan was part of a panel discussing the Arab Spring, steps that regional actors could take to help ensure a peaceful transition to democracy, and the impact of these revolutions on Israel. The panel also featured, among others, former IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, and former senior Presidential adviser Dennis Ross.

Dagan, who has maintained a high profile since his tenure as Mossad chief ended, said that “the radicals in the Arab League are no longer there and a range of mutual interests that require regional cooperation provide an incredible opportunity for fostering peaceful relations.” Still, he acknowledged that the Arab Spring is far from over: “I am worried about Islamist parties with a radical agenda that will take power. It will present a big problem for us.”

Referring to the recent Presidential election in Egypt and claims that the Muslim Brotherhood’s candidate Mohammed Morsi is slated for victory, he said that “in Egypt it was never important which way the votes go but who counts them.”

Former IDF chief Ashkenazi also weighed in on the monumental changes taking place in the Arab world, saying that “the storm sweeping the Arab world is of tectonic proportions. It happens once every 100 years and cannot be overestimated. This is not just a coup. I don’t know anyone in the defense establishment that predicted what happened there.” He said it was critical that Israel preserve open lines of communication with the Egyptian army: “It is practically the only channel…with Turkey as well.”

Discussing the importance of Israel maintaining its relative military superiority, Ashkenazi offered his solution to the controversial issue of national/military service for all Israeli citizens: “It has long been my belief that not everyone must be drafted. We should go by a principle of service for all, not enlistment for all.

“The IDF should get first pick,” he continued. “Whoever is not selected by the IDF will go to the Fire Services, Magen David Adom or other services…As for the haredim, it’s very important they join the army and then enter the work force. The Torah greats will decide who goes to yeshivot and the rest will join the army.”

Dennis Ross, talking about the role that the U.S. should play in the Arab Spring, said “we in the West are not the authors of this story, so we won’t be the ones to write it. But if we are asked for help, we should offer it, with ground rules – respect religion, minorities and free speech – if they don’t follow these rules they shouldn’t be entitled to help.”

The Presidential Conference will wrap up tomorrow, after hearing from the likes of Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Chairman of the Jewish Agency Natan Sharansky, Rabbi Michael Melchior, and journalist Caroline Glick.

Mais la Jordanie ne serait pas touchée selon lui. Comment peut-il savoir cela?

Dagan predicts Arab Spring won’t reach Jordan

Making Sense of a Rightwing Israeli Institute’s Ambivalent View of Arab Democracy

Israel lobby celebrates Treasury’s successful use of “financial tools” to support Arab Spring

Pourquoi Israël se réjouit-il de l’arrivée de partis islamiques au pouvoir? (en Égypte)

Pourquoi Israel soutient des rebelles jihadistes musulmans? une telle instabilité ne met-elle pas en danger l'existence d'Israel demande la journaliste à BHL. Non, répond-il! (Après une longue déclaration de son attachement inconditionnel à Israel) "C'est bon pour Israël!"

Attends, j'ai pas saisi en quoi c'est bon pour Israel.

Éjecter Assad et Khadafi c'étaient déjà en soi des objectifs sionistes, mais fallait-il à tout prix fomenter une révolution dans tout le pays avec l'aide de sectateurs musulmans terroristes, tout ça pour un simple assassinat politique? Il semble qu'il manque encore un élément de réponse pour expliquer pourquoi Israel soutiendrait des djihadistes au lieu de tout simplement éliminer Assad physiquement (ce qui ne devrait pas être si difficile pour le Mossad et ses armées de Sayanim).

Piper explique le principe du "sionisme catastrophe" ou "sionisme de guerre", selon lequel Israel doit toujours être sur un pied de guerre avec au moins un ennemi, si c'est pas sur plusieurs fronts, pour survivre. Israel carbure au conflit, à la crise, à la guerre perpétuelle. Sans la guerre Israel ne se voit plus de raison d'être, éclate de l'intérieur et tombe de lui-même. Il doit donc se faire plein d'ennemis, réels ou pas, c'est pas ça l'essentiel. L'essentiel c'est la provocation réussie qui victimisation, qui renfloue sans cesse leur capital de sympathie.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/catastrophic_zionism_257.html

While most rational people would assume that Israel would prefer to have neighboring states that are stable, successful participants in the region, this is not necessarily the case.

In fact, a carefully crafted “think piece” entitled “A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s,” featured in the February 1982 edition of the World Zionist Organization’s Jerusalem-based publication Kivunim: A Journal for Judaism and Zionism, candidly put forth an Israeli strategy to wreak havoc in the Arab world, dividing the Arab states from within. The author was Oded Yinon, an Israeli journalist with close ties to Israel’s Foreign Ministry.

The program—which amounted to “balkanizing” the various Arab republics, splitting them into religious enclaves in which, for example, Shiite Muslims or otherwise Sunni Muslims would predominate—was an agenda that Israeli dissident Israel Shahak said, quite simply, was designed “to make an imperial Israel into a world power,” by disrupting the Arab states and thereby setting the stage for Israeli dominance in the Mideast.

The formula was founded on the idea of creating chaos among Israel’s Arab neighbors, hardly a policy any decent, well-meaning neighbor could be credited for fostering. In fact, the current-day political and religious divisions and devastation in Iraq—the consequence of the American invasion of Iraq demanded by the pro-Israel lobby in Washington—mirrors precisely what the Zionist position paper laid forth as the ideal state of affairs for Iraq, from an Israeli point of view, that is.

But where does Egypt fit into all of this? Reflecting on the Zionist strategy paper, Ralph Schoenman—an eminent American Jewish critic of Zionism—writing in 1988 in his book, The Hidden History of Zionism, pointedly noted the paper’s intent of “double-crossing Mubarak” and emphasized that the Yinon paper hoped for “the downfall and dissolution of Egypt,” despite the 1979 Camp David peace agreement.

This is geopolitics at its best—or worst—and demonstrates the kind of gambles Israel has historically been willing to take.

After all, Israel helped subsidize and nurture the fledgling Hamas faction within the Palestinian statehood movement, as a means to counter and undermine the secular Fatah faction led by senior Palestinian statesman Yassir Arafat. But Hamas got out of control, grew in popularity, and now stands as one of Israel’s chief rivals.

Such gamesmanship by Israel is part of a philosophy known as “catastrophic Zionism,” a term used almost exclusively by Israeli and Jewish writers.

The theme of “catastrophic Zionism,” sometimes called “war Zionism,” suggests that Israel—as a state— relies on crisis and the potential of war with its neighbors as a foundation of its very existence. This has actually been the belief of many hard-line “right wing” elements going back to the earliest days of Israel.

In short, there are many Zionists who believe such crisis is vital—fundamental—to Israel’s survival. And for this reason, the believers in “catastrophic Zionism” will never lend their support to any policy, domestic or international, that could lead to a final solution of the conflict between Israel and its Arab and Muslim neighbors.

In actual fact, this notion—that peace could be dangerous to the survival of Israel—is a governing concept in the minds of many Israelis and their supporters worldwide.

Is Israel the Winner of the Arab Spring?

by Gabriel M. Scheinmann

Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs

Israelis understandably feel imperiled by the misnamed “Arab Spring.” Their country’s three-decade peace treaty with Egypt is under assault, its strategic alliance with Turkey has dissolved, and its closest regional ally, Jordan, is withering from domestic protests.

The breakdown in political authority has flooded Israel’s borders with a slew of dangerous weapons, from Libyan missiles in Gaza to Syrian Scuds in southern Lebanon. Meanwhile, the Iranian nuclear program progresses unabated. Individually, each of these developments is cause for great concern; taken together, Israelis see the walls closing in.

Although the initial flickers of liberalism have been subsumed by the Islamist bonfire, the so-called “Arab Spring” has, paradoxically, made Israel stronger as Israel’s enemies have turned on each other. While Arab capitals burn, Jerusalem has calmly and carefully steeled itself against the possible immediate deleterious effects, building fences along its Egyptian and Jordanian borders and accelerating the deployment of its Iron Dome anti-missile system. Whereas Arab states remain mired in internal political, economic, and military turmoil, Israel hums along, its economy intact – tourism is at an all-time high – its military untested, and its government united.

For three decades, Mubarak’s Egypt was the anchor of Israel’s regional security. Since his ouster, the lawless Sinai has been the source of rocket attacks, Egypt has canceled its gas contract with Israel, Israel’s Cairo embassy staff barely survived an attempted mob lynching and the Muslim Brotherhood has issued disquieting verbal volleys against the peace treaty.

As these troubling developments suggest, the capacity of the Egyptian state has also fundamentally declined. The Egyptian economy is in dire straits: foreign reserves have dropped 60 percent, foreign direct investment has fallen by 90 percent, and this year’s budget deficit is 10.4 percent of GDP – America’s is 7.6 percent – and trending upwards. Furthermore, Egypt’s military regime and the Muslim Brotherhood are focused inward on reestablishing order and consolidating political control. Any warlike move by an Islamist-led Egypt would trigger the elimination of the American military aid that currently funds nearly 40 percent of Egypt’s defense budget. The Egyptian body politic may indeed be more hostile to the Jewish State, but its capabilities for acting on that hostility have markedly declined.

Israel’s concerns about a volatile Syria also belie the advantages reaped by a damaged Syria. Concerned about the potential transfer of Syrian Scuds or chemical weapons to Hezbollah, Israel is apprehensive of both a last ditch attempt by Assad to embroil it in war or by the possible ascent of another Islamist regime.

However, irrespective of Assad’s ability to cling to power, post-uprising Syria will also be a shell of its former self. Like Egypt, its economy is in tatters, having been hit hard by Western sanctions on its oil industry, which accounts for 30 percent of its budget. Its’ army has suffered large defections and losses at the hands of the rebels and its’ patron, Iran, has invested massively in propping up its sole regional ally. Even Hezbollah, aware of its current tenuous position in the Lebanese powder keg, finds itself increasingly isolated, having sided with Assad. Israel’s northern border has never been quieter.

Even in Gaza, where Hamas is ensconced, Israel’s successful deployment of the game-changing Iron Dome missile defense system has revolutionized the security situation, resulting in no Israeli casualties due to rocket fire thus far this year. Hamas abandoned its cozy headquarters in Damascus, fearful of aligning itself with the heretical Alawite sect against its Sunni Muslim brothers, and continues the political tug-of-war with Fatah in the West Bank. Even beyond Israel’s immediate borders, the “Arab Spring” has uncorked ethno-religious conflicts. PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party) attacks on Turkish military targets have spiked, fighting continues between Arab, African, and Berber tribesmen in Libya, and two new independent states have been declared, the Tuareg state of Azawad in northwestern Mali and South Sudan, marking the first loss of “Arab” sovereignty in 45 years.

Even as it rightly plans for the changes wrought by the “Arab Spring,” Israel should also recognize that as the Middle East convulses, it is more likely to be left alone. As Alawites battle Arab Sunnis and Kurds in Syria, as Kurds target Turks in Turkey, as the Imazighen fight Arabs in Libya, as the Army contends with Islamists in Egypt, and as Sunnis and Christians confront Shiites in Lebanon, people don’t have the time, energy, or resources to fight the Jews in Israel. The more the region tears itself apart, the more Israel floats to the top, unscathed economically, militarily, or diplomatically. While an Islamist ascent is undesirable, the intervening disorder only makes Israel stronger.

JINSA: Arab Spring disorder makes Israel stronger

with 9 comments

By Maidhc Ó Cathail
The Passionate Attachment
July 16, 2012

In a July 11 article on the JINSA website, visiting fellow Gabriel M. Scheinmann confirms what readers of The Passionate Attachment have known for some time:

Although the initial flickers of liberalism have been subsumed by the Islamist bonfire, the so-called “Arab Spring” has, paradoxically, made Israel stronger as Israel’s enemies have turned on each other. While Arab capitals burn, Jerusalem has calmly and carefully steeled itself against the possible immediate deleterious effects, building fences along its Egyptian and Jordanian borders and accelerating the deployment of its Iron Dome anti-missile system. Whereas Arab states remain mired in internal political, economic, and military turmoil, Israel hums along, its economy intact – tourism is at an all-time high – its military untested, and its government united.
For three decades, Mubarak’s Egypt was the anchor of Israel’s regional security. Since his ouster, the lawless Sinai has been the source of rocket attacks, Egypt has canceled its gas contract with Israel, Israel’s Cairo embassy staff barely survived an attempted mob lynching and the Muslim Brotherhood has issued disquieting verbal volleys against the peace treaty.
As these troubling developments suggest, the capacity of the Egyptian state has also fundamentally declined. The Egyptian economy is in dire straits: foreign reserves have dropped 60 percent, foreign direct investment has fallen by 90 percent, and this year’s budget deficit is 10.4 percent of GDP – America’s is 7.6 percent – and trending upwards. Furthermore, Egypt’s military regime and the Muslim Brotherhood are focused inward on reestablishing order and consolidating political control. Any warlike move by an Islamist-led Egypt would trigger the elimination of the American military aid that currently funds nearly 40 percent of Egypt’s defense budget. The Egyptian body politic may indeed be more hostile to the Jewish State, but its capabilities for acting on that hostility have markedly declined.
Israel’s concerns about a volatile Syria also belie the advantages reaped by a damaged Syria. Concerned about the potential transfer of Syrian Scuds or chemical weapons to Hezbollah, Israel is apprehensive of both a last ditch attempt by Assad to embroil it in war or by the possible ascent of another Islamist regime.
However, irrespective of Assad’s ability to cling to power, post-uprising Syria will also be a shell of its former self. Like Egypt, its economy is in tatters, having been hit hard by Western sanctions on its oil industry, which accounts for 30 percent of its budget. Its’ army has suffered large defections and losses at the hands of the rebels and its’ patron, Iran, has invested massively in propping up its sole regional ally. Even Hezbollah, aware of its current tenuous position in the Lebanese powder keg, finds itself increasingly isolated, having sided with Assad. Israel’s northern border has never been quieter.
Even in Gaza, where Hamas is ensconced, Israel’s successful deployment of the game-changing Iron Dome missile defense system has revolutionized the security situation, resulting in no Israeli casualties due to rocket fire thus far this year. Hamas abandoned its cozy headquarters in Damascus, fearful of aligning itself with the heretical Alawite sect against its Sunni Muslim brothers, and continues the political tug-of-war with Fatah in the West Bank. Even beyond Israel’s immediate borders, the “Arab Spring” has uncorked ethno-religious conflicts. PKK (Kurdistan Workers’ Party) attacks on Turkish military targets have spiked, fighting continues between Arab, African, and Berber tribesmen in Libya, and two new independent states have been declared, the Tuareg state of Azawad in northwestern Mali and South Sudan, marking the first loss of “Arab” sovereignty in 45 years.
Even as it rightly plans for the changes wrought by the “Arab Spring,” Israel should also recognize that as the Middle East convulses, it is more likely to be left alone. As Alawites battle Arab Sunnis and Kurds in Syria, as Kurds target Turks in Turkey, as the Imazighen fight Arabs in Libya, as the Army contends with Islamists in Egypt, and as Sunnis and Christians confront Shiites in Lebanon, people don’t have the time, energy, or resources to fight the Jews in Israel. The more the region tears itself apart, the more Israel floats to the top, unscathed economically, militarily, or diplomatically. While an Islamist ascent is undesirable, the intervening disorder only makes Israel stronger.

It appears that Carl Gershman, Peter Ackerman, Jared Cohen, et al. knew what they were doing after all when they helped unleash the supposedly Israel-threatening Arab democratic wave. As no doubt did Israeli President Shimon Peres when during an April 2011 visit to Washington he urged aid to the “the awakening of the Arab world.”

VIDEO - Syria's Destruction to Create a Greater Israel: The Ugly Truth

Israel is the only real winner of the so-called ‘Arab Spring’

with 2 comments

By Maidhc Ó Cathail
The Passionate Attachment
August 18, 2012
Award-winning Iranian journalist Kourosh Ziabari recently interviewed me about the ongoing destabilization of the Middle East and North Africa commonly referred to as the Arab Spring.
KZ: In a recent article in the Washington Post, Charles Krauthammer wrote that the SCAF hastily dissolved the Egyptian parliament because the majority of members of parliament elected in the post-Mubarak elections were Islamists. Does Mohammad Morsi’s acceptance of the military council’s decision denote that he might be inclined toward the West? The U.S. Secretary of State Clinton has just paid a visit to Egypt and met with President Morsi. Are these signs indicative of the fact that Morsi has a pro-Western attitude and may betray the Egyptian Revolution?
MÓC: First of all, I don’t believe that there was a genuine revolution in Egypt in the first place. Like the “colour revolutions” in Serbia, Georgia, Ukraine and elsewhere, the so-called “Arab Spring” was orchestrated by the regime change specialists at the National Endowment for Democracy, Freedom House, the International Center on Nonviolent Conflict and the wider network of groups engaged in what is euphemistically called “democracy promotion.” While the mainstream media cannot openly admit this, they have given some strong hints. For example, a New York Times report in April 2011, aptly entitled “U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings,” acknowledged that “as American officials and others look back at the uprisings of the Arab Spring, they are seeing that the United States’ democracy-building campaigns played a bigger role in fomenting protests than was previously known, with key leaders of the movements having been trained by the Americans in campaigning, organizing through new media tools and monitoring elections.” Unless we are to believe that these “democracy-building campaigns” were not intended to undermine authoritarian regimes like Mubarak’s, then there’s no “revolution” for the American-educated Morsi to betray. Interestingly, it appears that it was Krauthammer, a Guardian of Zion awardee, who was the first to use the term “Arab Spring.” In the same 2005 piece, he presciently wrote, “The democracy project is, of course, just beginning.”
KZ: What will be, in your view, the attitude of the new government in Egypt toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Prior to the elections, the Israelis were extremely worried that an Islamist president might revoke the Camp David Accords. However, Morsi hasn’t decided to do so. Will the new government in Egypt support the Palestinian resistance front?
MÓC: One has to distinguish between what Israeli officials say publicly and what they think privately. If Tel Aviv was genuinely worried about an Islamist government revoking the Camp David Accords, then why has its American lobby been so supportive of a democratic transition to civilian rule in Cairo, knowing full well that this would increase the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood? A recent article featured on the website of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) gives a clearer insight into Israeli strategic thinking. Entitled “Is Israel the Winner of the Arab Spring?” the piece concludes that “the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ has, paradoxically, made Israel stronger as Israel’s enemies have turned on each other.” As the JINSA fellow astutely observes, “The Egyptian body politic may indeed be more hostile to the Jewish State, but its capabilities for acting on that hostility have markedly declined.”
Read the rest of this entry »

‘Prisoner of Zion’ Promoting Arab Democracy @Google in 2010

S Y R I E

Comme BHL, Israël demande une "intervention massive" en Syrie.

Pour BHL, on s’en serait douté: « une intervention en Syrie est inévitable » …

Quelles leçons faut-il tirer des fantasmes guerriers de Bernard Henry Lévy (BHL) ?

Le sayan BHL ne sait pas écrire, mais son officier traitant sait compter...

Syrie: "une intervention massive" (Israël)

(AFP) Le vice-ministre israélien des Affaires étrangères, Danny Ayalon, a estimé aujourd'hui à Paris que la communauté internationale devait préparer "une intervention massive" en Syrie, pour éviter "une extension du conflit au Liban et en Irak". "Plus on attend, plus il y aura de chaos et de victimes. Il n'y a pas grand chose qu'Israël puisse faire, c'est au peuple syrien, à l'Occident et à la Russie de trouver une solution pour arrêter les massacres", a dit à quelques journalistes Danny Ayalon, lors d'une visite en France.

"La solution la plus efficace serait une intervention massive de la communauté internationale, sur le modèle de ce qui s'est passé en Bosnie", a-t-il poursuivi, évoquant le déploiement d'une force armée d'interposition. "Il est nécessaire d'y associer tous les pays concernés, y compris et surtout la Russie. Il faudra certainement trouver une solution pour (le président) Bachar el-Assad et sa famille", a souligné Ayalon.

"Si rien ne se passe, il y a un grand risque d'une extension du conflit au Liban et en Irak, deux pays qui partagent de nombreuses similitudes avec la Syrie", a mis en garde le ministre, qui devait s'entretenir dans la journée avec le chef de la diplomatie française Laurent Fabius. Le président israélien Shimon Peres avait déclaré le 10 juin qu'il souhaitait la victoire des rebelles en Syrie. Israël est formellement en état de guerre avec la Syrie, son voisin au nord, mais la frontière entre les deux pays n'a connu aucun incident notable depuis la fin de la guerre israélo-arabe en octobre 1973.

La Syrie est en proie depuis mars 2011 à une révolte sans précédent contre le régime de Bachar el-Assad. Selon l'Observatoire syrien des droits de l'Homme (OSDH), la répression et les combats entre armée et rebelles ont déjà fait plus de 15.000 morts, en majorité des civils.