FresnoZionism.org — ציונות פרסנו

Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel here, either.

A federal policy that bans Canadians from listing Jerusalem, Israel, as their birthplace on their passports does not violate the Charter of Rights, the Federal Court of Appeal said Tuesday.

The ruling came in the context of a three-judge panel decision that the Canadian government was not required to allow 19-year-old Eliyahu Veffer, the son of a Toronto rabbi, to amend his passport to indicate that his birthplace, Jerusalem, was part of Israel.

The Canadian National Post reported that the decision upheld a 2006 court ruling that Canada’s passport policy was neither discriminatory nor a violation of religious freedom, despite the fact that Israel was the only exception to a practice of letting passport applicants list their birth country of choice when dealing with cities in disputed territories.

The federal government, citing the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians over the control of Jerusalem, insisted that immigrants who were born there are issued passports without any reference to a country. — Jerusalem Post (my emphasis)

The fact that only the eastern part of the city is outside the 1967 borders of Israel is ignored.

They also apparently do not admit that the annexation of Jerusalem, which included an offer of full citizenship to all residents and which took place after a war the Arabs started and lost, was legitimate.

Perhaps they are using the Hamas definition of occupied territory, which includes Tel Aviv? In this case, no Canadian should have ‘Israel’ listed as their birthplace.

Since the Parti Québécois disputes the proposition that Montreal, for example, is part of Canada, should passports list “Montreal, Canada”?

Technorati Tags: Israel, Canada

Little seems to have changed in 30 years. Certainly not the US State Department, which still advises the President every year that ‘national security’ would be damaged if the US embassy were moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Today’s Dry Bones Blog features a cartoon from 1977, which is more to the point than ever today:

The Western acquiescence to the Arab view that Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel continues to be an affront to Israel’s sovereignty. The Knesset has been meeting in West Jerusalem since the building was constructed in 1950.

The Arabs should be grateful for the fact that they are permitted to live in Jerusalem at all and that the Muslim holy places there still exist and are under Muslim control. When Jordan conquered East Jerusalem in 1948, all Jews living there were driven out or killed, synagogues were destroyed or converted to stables, and Jewish gravestones were used as paving material.

The Arab and Muslim attitude seems to be that they are not required to behave according to post-7th century standards, but that everyone else must be exquisitely sensitive to their feelings. And the response in the West seems to be to appease them.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Arabs, Jerusalem

I’ve written several times about the possibility of war between Israel and Syria (see “Syria prepares — for what?“, “Peace between Israel and Syria?“). Recently there have been more threatening noises from Syria, regarding the Golan Heights. Here is one interpretation:

Is Syria serious, or is Syria trying to pull a grand bluff? The Syrians probably are not too interested in getting back the Golan Heights, which they could get if they offered real peace in direct negotiations – up to the international borders. The goal of Syria seems to be to bluff the Israelis and Americans into agreeing to American mediated negotiations, giving Syria “legitimacy” and immunity for its meddling in Lebanon and Iraq as a “peace partner,” and to trade an edifying fiction of peace negotiations with Israel in return for getting away with the murder of Rafiq Hariri. — Ami Isseroff, ZioNation (entire article recommended)

There is no question that one of Syria’s primary goals is to reassert influence over Lebanon and to avoid having the murders of Hariri and other anti-Syrian figures pinned on them.

And as Barry Rubin pointed out, an actual peace treaty with Israel is not a price that Syria wants to pay for the Golan; Assad needs the conflict with Israel for internal reasons:

It is commonplace to say that Syria wants back the Golan Heights. But one need merely ask the simple question: what happens if Syria gets it back? If Syria’s regime made peace with Israel it has no excuse for having a big military, a dictatorship, and a terrible economy. The day after the deal the Syrian people will start demanding change. The regime knows that. — Interview with Barry Rubin by Michael J. Totten

But there is also no question that Assad wants the Golan. Nor is there any doubt that the true Great Satan of the Middle East, Ahmadinejad’s Iran, wants the Golan in Syrian hands, for its strategic value in any conflict on Israel’s northern border.

As if it’s not difficult enough, it’s not sufficient to try to determine Syria’s intentions in this case — one must also look at Syria’s major patron, Iran. And Iranian intentions towards Israel, as expressed by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, are anything but benign. On June 3 of this year, the Iranian news agency Mehr quoted him as saying,

“The arrogant superpowers and the Zionist regime invested all their efforts during the 33-day war, but after 60 years, their pride has been trampled and the countdown to the destruction of this regime has been started by Hizbullah fighters”…

Ahmadinejad added that “with the help of all the Lebanese and Palestinian fighters, we will witness the destruction of this regime in the near future… Anyone who works for God and believes in the power of the people will prevail.” — YNet

Although the threat posed by a nuclear Iran often overshadows more conventional ones, it seems to me that the Iranian plan is to eliminate Israel by means of a conventional conflict prosecuted by its clients Hezbollah, Syria, and Hamas. The Syrian medium and long-range missile arsenal, which includes chemical and possibly biological weapons is certainly dangerous, if it is sufficiently hardened (or hidden) to prevent Israel from destroying it in a preemptive strike.

There is one more element in the equation, which can’t be ignored. That is the major arms supplier and patron of patrons, Russia. Russia and the US seem to by vying for control of the region (shades of 1967!) and a US-aligned and nuclear Israel is the main obstacle in its way. So Russia may encourage Iranian and Syrian ambitions.

Israel’s formidable retaliatory capability should be a deterrent to Syria, at least at this point. And it’s not clear if Iran’s conventionally-armed missile arsenal is a serious threat today.

My opinion is that Iran is not pushing for the final confrontation in the very near future. Ahmadinejad has learned from previous Israeli/Arab conflicts, and will not jump too soon. The strategy seems to be to weaken Israel and push back her borders in a piecemeal fashion until they believe that success is guaranteed.

Therefore, what I expect is continued pressure from the Palestinians in the south, Hezbollah along the Lebanese border, and Syria on the Golan. Since it is highly unlikely that Assad will be willing to conclude an actual peace agreement with Israel, I interpret the current threat as a real threat of limited war — at least, a war that one hopes will stay limited.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Syria, Iran

Israel is coming closer to releasing Fatah prisoners:

The cabinet approved on Sunday the proposed release of 250 Fatah security prisoners, but the actual list of names is being revised and will be brought to the ministers for approval at a later date, possibly in a week’s time.

The prisoners are expected to be members of Fatah who “did not have blood on their hands,” i.e. prisoners who had not personally participated in lethal terrorist attacks…

Following the vote, Public Security Minister Avi Dichter said that in the last 13 years, releasing Palestinian prisoners had never translated to a gesture from the Palestinian Authority that would reduce terror activity, Israel Radio reported. — Jerusalem Post

Indeed, we might add that previous releases often resulted in increased terrorism, as the newly freed prisoners went back to ‘work’.

Meir Indor, who heads a terror victims’ association, is trying to prevent the prisoner release from happening.

In the last five years, 179 Israelis have been murdered by terrorists who were previously in prison, said Indor. Many of the former prisoners were freed as a result of politically motivated deals.

“Once you give them a second chance, they prove that they can do it better,” Indor said… CNS News

This action is distinct from the prisoner release demanded by Hamas in return for kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit, and is being done to “strengthen the Abbas government” in the West Bank.

Although it will provide an increment of additional manpower for Fatah to confront Hamas if it comes to that, a mini-civil war between Hamas and Fatah such as happened in Gaza is highly unlikely. Indeed, Egypt and Saudi Arabia have already suggested that a Fatah/Hamas rapprochement is the way to go. And even some Fatah members seem to echo this:

Riad Maliki, the information minister in Abbas’s new government, said he expected the 250 prisoners to be former military men from pro-Fatah security forces. “If it were in our hands to chose … we would have chosen a group that more fairly represented the body of Palestinian prisoners, from all political groups,” Maliki said. — Jerusalem Post

So what, exactly, does Israel get out of this gesture, besides additional terrorists running around? Does it “strengthen Abbas” by increasing popular support for him? Hardly — Hamas simply paints this as collaboration with Israel:

In Gaza, Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said a release of Fatah prisoners signaled that Abbas is collaborating with Israel. “He should have refused any release unless it includes all Palestinian prisoners,” he said.

Israeli Prime Minister Olmert suggested that the release would improve the chances that Gilad Shalit, held by Hamas in Gaza, would be released. It seems to me that it might even have the opposite effect, given that Hamas would not wish for Abbas to get credit for having any part in Shalit’s release.

Technorati Tags: Israel, Fatah, Hamas, prisoner release