Clinton Surprises: 16 Meters of Wall

As we all should know, the Clinton Parameters for peace in December 2000 included this:

Israel would gain sovereignty over the Western Wall. The Palestinians would gain sovereignty and Israel would gain "symbolic ownership" over the rest [that should be the 'underground' are] of the Temple Mount, with both parties sharing sovereignty over the issue of excavations under the Temple Mount.

However, all seem surprised today at reports of Clinton restating history:

Former United States President Bill Clinton claimed on Wednesday [in] comments...made during a speech at Georgetown University in Virginia [you can hear/see the clip in this Hebrew news item], during which he made some revelations regarding the Camp David Summit attended by himself, then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and then-PA Chairman Yasser Arafat.

"The Israelis offered to give it (the Temple Mount) to the Palestinians," Clinton was quoted by Channel 2 as having said.

“They disagreed about only 16 meters of the Western Wall, about which Israel was right,” he continued, saying that the 16 meters in question were land leading to the Western Wall tunnels and that “if you got in, you could do mayhem to the ruins of the temples.”

True, Robert Malley claimed in the New York Times of July 8, 2001 that during the 2000 Camp David II, it was discussed that

Israel would exercise overall sovereignty over this area, known to Jews as the Temple Mount. 

and Moshe Amirav, in his book "Jerusalem Syndrome" on page 153, claims that Barak insisted on "not conceding the Temple Mount".  Greg Myre of the NYTimes writes in his book that the whole purpose of Arik Sharon ascending to the Temple Mount in September 2000, at the urging of Uri Dan, was to protest Barak's concessions on Jerusalem and the Temple Mount.

Aaron Klein, though, already in 2007, reported on what Haaretz published:

REVEALED: ISRAEL AGREED TO FORFEIT TEMPLE MOUNTPublished: 12/13/2007
In spite of longstanding denials by top officials here, the Israeli government in 2000 agreed to relinquish the Temple Mount – Judaism’s holiest site – to the Palestinians during U.S.-backed negotiations, according to declassified documents made public today.

According to declassified Israeli government documents published today by Israel’s Haaretz newspaper, during U.S.-led negotiations in 2000 at Camp David, Ehud Barak, then prime minister, agreed sovereignty over the Temple Mount would be either “ambiguous” or control would be determined based on the bond of each party to the site. The Palestinians would therefore control the upper sections of the Mount, which houses the Al Aqsa Mosque and also is the site of the First and Second Jewish Temples.

...Barak at times denied he offered the Temple Mount to the Palestinians, but he also indicated during interviews he was willing to compromise over the site.

But what Clinton got wrong was this:

a. Arafat never believed the Temple was ever on the Temple Mount

b. the "mayhem" would not be done to the "ruins of the temples" (see 'a' above) but Arafat's fear was that Israel would undermine the Al-Aqsa Mosque or Dome of the Rock or cause the whole compound to collapse.

^

From Temple Mount to Hebron - Who's In Charge?

The news from Hebron is

Residents of the newly populated Machpela House in Hevron received official IDF orders Monday to leave the premises "out of concern for public safety."
"The eviction orders we received this hour speak for themselves," the residents said, "and make it clear that there is no problem with the purchase of the house. The sale is completely 'kosher' and the only thing that bothers [Defense Minister] Ehud Barak is the fact that Jews live in Hevron.

Well, my first reaction is that those amongst our national/religious camp who were hesitant about lobbying on behalf of Jewish rights on the Temple Mount due to issues of sanctity of the location, ignoring the larger matter of what the State of Israel is supposed to be serving - where the courts accepted the State's appeal based on an 'exceptional case' definition made up to solve a delicate concern, in other words, entrance and prayer would cause public disorder if Jews exercised their legal rights (blame the Jews attitude) - are now faced with the result: instead of using the Machpela option (that Jews & Muslims can share the same building and therefore Jews & Muslims could and should share an open-air precinct), - they now face the negative side, if Arabs attack Jews in Hebron at that house, it's the Jews' fault. As for other issues, note:

Education Minister Gideon Sa'ar on Monday condemned the order of evacuation facing settlers in the "Beit Hamachpela" (House of the Patriarchs) apartment building, calling it underhanded and unjustified. Earlier Monday, the IDF ordered the West Bank Hebron settlers to leave an apartment building in their city, called "Beit Hamachpela" (House of the Patriarchs) by 3 p.m. on Tuesday, giving the settlers 24 hours to evacuate the home. "This decision was made even without a hearing demanded by the Prime Minister [Binyamin Netanyahu]," he said. "If the house was purchased legally, there is no justification for evacuating the residents."

So, who is in charge here? P.S. Talking about property, remember that Barak received millions for his penthouse. ^

The Sabotager

Here:

Barak: We must apologize for flotilla errors

Series of meetings with US administration officials reinforces defense minister's view that diplomatic crisis with Ankara must be resolved. 'I don't like it, but having reasonable relations with Turkey is not a bad thing,' he explains

Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Friday, following meetings with US administration officials, that Israel must reach a compromise with Turkey – even if this meant the Jewish state would have to apologize for the deadly raid on a Gaza-bound flotilla last year.

"I'm not talking about an apology for the blockade or an apology for the flotilla, but about saying that if any errors were made during the operation – we regret them," he explained...

A loch in kop.

^

The Pragmatism of Ehud Barak

Reported

Israeli defence minister Ehud Barak said Friday Israel could not stop settlement construction in Jerusalem and the West Bank citing what he called "natural growth" of the settlements.

In an interview with France 24 television channel in an interview that part of what had been built might go to Palestinians under a negotiated settlement.

"If we have a breakthrough, it will delineate a border. If there’s a building that ends up on the Palestinian side of a mutually agreed border, why should they care – they will get it." Likewise, he added, "If it ends up on the Israeli side of a mutually agreed upon border, why should they care. It’s on our side anyhow," he explained.

And

Settlements, he insisted, are "not the real issue when coming to negotiations."

Here, see for yourselves. Starts around the 5 minute mark.

50-50 is very good as odds for "peace negotiations" (see 3:50).

But this is better news:

Cabinet expected to curtail Barak's power to veto West Bank settlement construction - Anticipated decision would move control of World Zionist Organization's Settlement Division from Agriculture Ministry to Prime Minister's Office.

^

It's "BibiEhud"

I saw this ad in the newspaper but only came across it on the Internet now:

That's "BibiEhud" there or Ehud Netanyahu.

The ad is sponsored by the Mateh Meshutaf, Kommemiyut and the Residents Actions Committees of Benjamin and Samaria.  It zeros in on four major themes: security, residency in the Land of Israel, losing the way and peace and portrays Netanyahu permitting Ehud Barak to undermine his fundamental positions and sabotage the right-of-center nationalist platform on which he won the last election.  His staff is also seen as fawning before Barak.

The message: The Likud Government Must Separate from Ehud Barak.

^

But Can We Trust Them?

From Evelyn Gordon:

...finally, a contingent of Israel’s left has said “enough”: As Israelis, it’s our job to negotiate the best deal for Israel, not the Palestinians. And it’s our job to promote Israel’s positions overseas, not to besmirch our own country by promoting the Palestinian narrative.

Right now, it’s a small contingent — five of Labor’s 13 MKs — spearheaded by a widely disliked leader, Defense Minister Ehud Barak. Thus its capacity for growth is unclear. But it does give the government stability, as these five are enough to ensure its majority (especially since many of the others never voted with it anyway). So at least the government is now better positioned to fight the diplomatic battles ahead.

More important, however, five MKs from the heart of the left have openly challenged the leftist parties’ destructive behavior. And if their challenge catches on, it could revolutionize Israel’s diplomatic position. For while many of the reasons for Israel’s growing pariah status have nothing to do with Israel, the chorus of Israelis blaming the ongoing conflict entirely on Israel clearly plays a role. If additional swathes of the left started advocating for their own country rather than its adversaries, Israel could fight back much more effectively.

There are plenty of reasons to dislike Barak and his allies. But in this effort, they deserve support from everyone who cares about Israel.

If only we could trust Israeli politicians to act for the benefit of the country.

The Newest Barak Bungle

I truly dislike it when diplomats, politicians, pundits and other riff-raff say:

The outline and the principles of an agreement are clear, known, and quite widely agreed upon

 because that stifles debate, quashes freedom of thought and the possibility of exploring new avenues.

But anyway, here is Ehud Barak from last week at the Saban Center:

e) Jerusalem will be discussed at the end of the negotiations, with reference to the Clinton parameters, namely: Western Jerusalem and the Jewish suburbs for us, the heavily populated Arab neighborhoods for them, and an agreed upon solution in the "Holy Basin".

Now, to illustrate that despite being "clear, know and agreed upon", Barak then goes on to emphasize Israel's worries:

Our experience in the second intifada and in the pullout from Lebanon and Gaza dictates that security arrangements must include three compelling elements:


• Preventing rockets and missiles from entering the West Bank.

• Preventing an outbreak of terror similar to the terror wave we faced in 2001 - 2003.

• Providing effective operational answer for future potential of a conventional attack on our narrow eastern border.

Dear readers, if Jerusalem goes the way of that 'Unholy Basin' initiative, the plug will be pulled on Israel and all three of the above elements will threaten Israel's citizens.

But at least he interjected abit of yiddishkeit in finishing his speech thus:

Thank you very much and Shabat Shalom.

^

The New "In" Word: Corrosive

Here's one use, revealed in a Wikileak:

The British attitude "would often be humourous were it not so corrosive," sniffed the U.S. deputy chief of mission in London, Richard LeBaron.

Here's Arianna Huffington:

...The aim of the Post and of the rally, she says with almost evangelical resolution, is to ask “how can we activate a countervailing force” to all that corrosive, aimless “mad as hell” negativity?

An Admiral:

While attacking the ''corrosive'' long-term effects of the military's policy banning openly gay and lesbian service, Mullen told the committee, ''Repeal of this law ... strengthens us. It will better ally those organizational values we claim with our practice.''

And, most invidiously, Hillary Clinton:

While Clinton listed Jerusalem as a final-status issue that would need to be addressed by the sides, she was more circumspect in possible prescriptions. But on another significant issue – settlements – she stressed American opposition.

“We do not accept the legitimacy of continued settlement activity,” she said. “We believe their continued expansion is corrosive not only to peace efforts and the two-state solution, but to Israel’s future itself.”

But if you really want a corrosive policy, here's Ehud Barak at that same conclave:

On Jerusalem – perhaps the most vexing issue – he described a solution that would split the city.

He said the issues would be discussed last and resolved along the lines of the (former US president Bill) Clinton parameters, namely “western Jerusalem and the Jewish suburbs for us, the heavily populated Arab neighborhoods for them, and an agreed upon solution in the ‘Holy Basin.’” One government source stressed on Saturday night that this was Barak’s position, and did not reflect the position of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who continually says that Jerusalem will remain the united capital of Israel. At the same time, Netanyahu has also made clear that he is ready to discuss all the core issues, including Jerusalem.

So, Barak backs Jerusalem partition plan.


^

Read Carefully

Read this carefully:-

CABINET COMMUNIQUE
(Communicated by the Cabinet Secretariat)

At the weekly Cabinet meeting today (Sunday), 10.1.10:

1. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made the following remarks:

"Last week 20 rockets and mortar rounds were fired at Israel from the Gaza Strip. I regard this very seriously. The IDF responded immediately; it attacked missile producing factories in the Gaza Strip and tunnels through which Iran smuggles missiles and rockets into the Strip. The Government's policy is clear: Any firing at our territory will be responded to strongly and immediately...

and then ask yourself:

1. If the government knows where these missile producing factories, why only now are they bombed?

2. If the government knows that tunnels are used to smuggle into the Gaza Strip missiles and rockets, why only now are they bombed?

3. Does the government know of anything else of a terror nature going on there?

4. If Bibi and Barak both knew the above, why are they still Prime Minister and Defense Minister respectively?

This Is A Coalition Partner?

Defense Minister Ehud Barak on Saturday said Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was ready to declare his support for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

"I believe Netanyahu is ready for a process whose end is two states for two peoples," Barak, who is also chairman of the center-left Labor party, told Channel 2.

Barak made the comments shortly before Netanyahu was to set off for a meeting with United States President Barack Obama in Washington, where he was likely to be asked to commit to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

Bend Backward Or Forward

Barak: Netanyahu will bend on Palestinian state

JERUSALEM (AP) — Israel's defense minister said in an interview published Tuesday that he expects Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to agree to the principle of Palestinian statehood — something the Israeli leader has balked at doing since taking office a month ago.

Hmmm.

Is that bending backward to assist the Jewish revenant residents in the communities despite pressure from without (America; EU) and within (J Street; Peace Now) or,

is that bending forward to get shtupped?

I've Got A Better Title

Shmuel Rosner has a piece in The New Republic: Love's Labor's Lost in which he describes

How Ehud Barak may resurrect his career, destroy his party, and save his country this week.

He also claims

Labor will add to this government's political stability, will make Netanyahu less dependent on the more radical elements of this coalition

Now, while I think most of Labor is radical, nevertheless the idea has merit if onkly to gut the Labor Party, finally.

In that case, my article will be entitled:

Labor's Love Lost

Barak Defeated By Hamas

If you can't beat them, join them, right?

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak, giving a campaign speech ahead of a Feb. 10 election, proposed on Monday linking the Gaza Strip with the occupied West Bank by digging a tunnel through Israeli territory.

The idea of connecting the two Palestinian territories has been raised in the past but has foundered along with U.S.-backed peace talks, mired in disputes over violence and Jewish settlements.

Great, we get missiles and mortars and rockets from both sides.

Brilliant general that Barak.

Here We Go; There Barak Doesn't Go

Haaretz reports:

Last update - 10:48 28/01/2009

Gaza rocket hits Negev; IAF strikes Hamas tunnels after soldier killed

A rocket fired by militants in Gaza struck the western Negev on Wednesday morning, adding impetus to flare-up in violence that threatened to rupture a shaky cease-fire in the coastal strip. No one was wounded in the rocket attack, which came shortly after Israel Air Force warplanes pounded smuggling tunnels under Gaza's border with Egypt. The air strikes followed a bomb blast Tuesday along the Israel-Gaza border, in which an Israel Defense Forces soldier was killed and three others were wounded.

Rafah residents began to flee their homes in panic as the Israeli aircraft struck three times, Hamas officials said.

and this:

13:22 Barak cancels trip to U.S. following flare-up in violence in the south (Haaretz)

And the Ynet report:

Defense Minister Ehud Barak decided to cancel his trip to the United States, during which he was scheduled to meet with Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. The decision came on the backdrop of events in the south.

See Ehud Barak Pack

Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak is to travel to Washington next week to discuss the implementation of a bilateral agreement to halt arms smuggling into Gaza, a senior official said on Saturday.

...Barak, who will leave on Tuesday, was to meet Secretary of Defence Robert Gates "to discuss the implementation of the Israeli-US memorandum of understanding" aimed at halting arms smuggling between Egypt and Gaza, he told AFP, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Is this him packing?



Actually, he's going to get a photo op pic with Obama for his election campaign.

Is That 'Half Empty' or 'Half Full'?

Barak: Half of weapon smuggling tunnels destroyed along Gaza border

...Barak said that Israel had destroyed about half of the "active" weapons-smuggling tunnels along the Gaza-Egypt border during the recent 22-day military operation in Gaza....Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Monday that Egypt can "dramatically reduce" Palestinian weapons smuggling along the Gaza border, and is more inclined to act following Israel's recent military operation in Gaza.

Half of more than 5 tons of explosives, ammunition and more is a helluva lot of terror.

So maybe all Barak brought Israel was not half but nuthin'?

Ehud Barak Goes It Alone

Ehud Barak's press conference was Ehud Barak alone, although Deputy Defense Minister Matan Vilanai sat at the table.

All this week, we saw Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni and Ehud Barak all together for all the most important government press conferences.

Tonight, Barak was alone.

So, either he wants all the credit or the other two don't want to be that identified with the military operation.

We'll have to wait for more info and background from the political reporters.

Columnist Klutzky or, Bovine Feces

Yoel Marcus is thought of as one of Israel's more senior - and therefore most influential - columnists. But not necessarily the smartest.

It was to him that Sharon gave his now famous interview basically announcing the plans for a disengagement (*see timeline below) from Gaza.

So, despite support for the current operation, he still ends up writing:

However Operation Cast Lead ends, the important side lesson we can learn from it is that territory is becoming less and less central to an agreement. Nowadays, when missiles can reach the same target from north or south or dozens of kilometers away, it is not as risky to give up some hill or other because it is close to the airport, for example.

The whole territorial business has lost its importance. More and more, holding on to territories and their impact on a political agreement is becoming a thing of the past. A kilometer here, a kilometer there. All of a sudden, it's passe - a relic from another era in missile history.

Remember the movie "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids?" Try "Honey, I Shrunk the Country" on for size.

This, of course, is unmitigated bovine feces, as my friend Dr. Amiel Unger once said of a Kissinger suggestion way back during the post-Yom Kippur negotiations.

I wonder what residents of Ashdod feel and those of Beer Sheva knowing that Marcus thinks that just a few kilometers is, well, nothing. After all, let Ashkelon and Ofakim residents go to hell is his implication.

This is twisted thinking, thinking so representative of Haaretz and a select media elite which supports politically the worse policies for our country. He is promoting Barak and he will fit Barak's thinking (he wrote in that article this about Barak: "Ordering this operation, the brainchild of Ehud Barak, was a stroke of brilliance"; "Barak, whatever the circuitous workings of his brilliant mind") into a framework which is wrong but just palpable enough to be spoonfed to weak minds.

If anything like the Gaza disengagement happens to Judea & Samaria, YESHA, you can forget about using Ben-Gurion Airport, Mr. Marcus.

Of course, you can always apologize later, if you are alive.

Here's what Marcus later wrote:

To my great sorrow, it now seems that the extremist and pessimistic settlers were those who were right. The Palestinians do not wish to recognize Israel and have not accepted its existence. And now, with the election of Hamas, they again are not missing any opportunity to miss an opportunity…They turned the communities of Gush Katif into launch sites against residents of the Negev and particularly the town of Sderot. The warnings of Ariel Sharon and Dan Halutz that ‘If they will fire Kassams after Gaza is evacuated, Israel’s response will be harsh’ has not really frightened them. -Haaretz, November 21, 2006

-----------

*

Disengagement timeline

November 13, 2003
­Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, close confidant of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, tells Haaretz in an interview that "the government of Israel is going to have to address the demographic issue with the utmost seriousness and resolve. This issue above all others will dictate the solution that we must adopt. In the absence of a negotiated agreement... we need to implement a unilateral alternative."

December 16, 2003
At the Herzliya Conference, Sharon announces his "disengagement plan," which he says will include "the redeployment of IDF forces along new security lines and a change in the deployment of settlements ... In the framework of a future agreement, Israel will not remain in all the places where it is today."

February 3, 2004 ­
In an interview with Haaretz commentator Yoel Marcus, Sharon says he plans to remove all settlements in the Gaza Strip and three in the northern West Bank.

March 28, 2004 ­
Knesset votes down bill on holding a national referendum on the disengagement plan.

April 14, 2004 ­
President George W. Bush and Sharon exchange letters. In his letter, Bush recognizes the "new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers ... It is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949." Sharon sees this as U.S. recognition of his demand to hold onto major settlement blocks in the West Bank in any final status agreement.

May 2, 2004 ­
Despite leading in the opinion polls weeks before the Likud referendum on the disengagement, Sharon is humiliated when party members vote against his plan by 60 to 40 percent. He declares he will forge ahead with the pullout.

more

And The London Times Finally Gets It Right, 18 Months later

From over a year and a half ago, Uzi Mahnaimi thought he knew it all:

ISRAEL’s new defence minister Ehud Barak is planning an attack on Gaza within weeks to crush the Hamas militants who have seized power there.

According to senior Israeli military sources, the plan calls for 20,000 troops to destroy much of Hamas’s military capability in days.

The raid would be triggered by Hamas rocket attacks against Israel or a resumption of suicide bombings.

Barak, who is expected to become defence minister tomorrow, has already demanded detailed plans to deploy two armoured divisions and an infantry division, accompanied by assault drones and F-16 jets, against Hamas.

The Israeli forces would expect to be confronted by about 12,000 Hamas fighters with arms confiscated from the Fatah faction that they defeated in last week’s three-day civil war in Gaza...

Well, almost right.

There was the "trigger" but it was always there.

And those "weeks" turned into months and then a year and then some more months.

Uzi, it was a matter of failing in the elections polls that really forced him to do what we all know had to be done long time ago.

Manny Winston Told Us So

“I TOLD YOU SO”

by Emanuel A. Winston, Mid East analyst & commentator

On December 13th I published a forecast on the high probability that Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (resigned due to imminent criminal indictments but still in power) and Defense Minister Ehud Barak would launch an attack (years too late) but, in sufficient time to help them and their cohorts in elections.

Today, December 31st, FOX NEWS with Bill Reilly and Dick Morris were discussing the Israeli retaliatory attack on Hamas in Gaza. Dick Morris, a well-known analyst, said that Hamas wanted a fight which gave the Kadima Party (Olmert, Barak and Livni) a better chance to succeed in the coming elections and to keep Bibi Netanyahu out of power...

Manny, who with his wife, Gail, fight the good fight and have been personal friends for years and I salute them.

His articles appear all over and can be found archived here. And alos at this site.