Concerns that the US's deal to swap five Taliban terrorists held in Guantanamo Bay for captive soldier Bowe Bergdahl have actualized Sunday, after two separate top-ranking Taliban officials told TIME magazine that the deal sets a precedent for more kidnappings.
“Our talks finally proved successful for the prisoners’ swap,” the commander said. “We returned our valued guest to his people and in return, they freed our five heroes held in Guantánamo Bay since 2002.”
“Besides our field commanders and fighters, our leader Mullah Mohammad Omar is so happy and is anxiously waiting to see his heroes,” he added. “I cannot explain how our people are happy and excited over this unbelievable achievement [. . .] this is a historic moment for us. Today our enemy for the first time officially recognized our status.”
“It’s better to kidnap one person like Bergdahl than kidnapping hundreds of useless people,” another commander said. “It has encouraged our people. Now everybody will work hard to capture such an important bird.”
The US State Department announced the prisoner exchange earlier this month, sparking a rare videotaped response from Taliban leader Omar calling the swap "a victory for our people."
The five Afghani Taliban prisoners are widely thought to be the most senior terrorists held by the US at Guantamano Bay, and concerns have been raised that their return could facilitate a major rise in terrorism in the volatile region.
The five include Khairullah Khairkhwa, a governor of Afghanistan's Herat province alleged to have direct links to Osama Bin Laden; Noorullah Noor, senior Taliban military commander implicated in mass murder against Shia Muslims; Mohammad Fazl, also implicated in war crimes against Shia Muslims and the Taliban's deputy defense minister during the 2001 war with the US; Mohammad Nabi Omari, senior military and security commander; and Abdul Haq Wasiq, deputy chief of the Taliban's intelligence service, who was said to be a key player in the Taliban's alliances with other Islamist groups to fight the US.
A Palestinian unity deal between the PLO and the genocidal Islamist Hamas movement must be supported, European Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso said in Israel on Sunday.
"In the interest of a future peace deal and of a legitimate and representative government, intra-Palestinian reconciliation... should be supported," he told delegates at a security conference in the coastal city of Herzliya.
He said such support should be conditioned on the acceptance of non-violence, a commitment to the two-state solution and a negotiated settlement of the conflict, accepting previous agreements and recognizing Israel.
When the PLO-Hamas reconciliation was announced in late April, the EU urged Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) to return to the negotiating table, saying US efforts to broker peace must not be allowed to "go to waste.”
"Negotiations are the best way forward," EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said in response to the breakdown a week earlier in months of efforts by Washington to keep the two sides talking.
"The extensive efforts deployed in recent months must not go to waste," Ashton's statement added. "The EU calls on all sides to exercise maximum restraint and to avoid any action which may further undermine peace efforts and the viability of a two-state solution."
Barroso also called on Israel and the Palestinian Arabs to find the "political courage" to take decisive steps "to bet on peace."
"The status quo may seem political safer in the short term but it cannot deliver any long term gains," he said. "Leadership is about making possible what is necessary, and peace is necessary in the region. Security for Israel and a state for the Palestinians are moral imperatives for the international community."
BEIJING, June 6 (RIA Novosti) - Russia and China are continuing to work closely to strengthen the BRICS economic bloc, which has made notable progress in many aspects in the last year, Secretary of the Russian Security Council Nikolai Patrushev said in Beijing.
"The development of the group of five is increasing. Our association remains an important driving force of the world economy, surpassing the total growth rates of the G7 BRICS has made significant progress in many aspects of its activities in the last year. We have formed unified positions on key policy issues: Syria, Iran, international terrorism, international information security," Patrushev said on Friday at the end of the 10th round of Russian-Chinese consultations on strategic security.
"I am confident that the forthcoming chairmanship of Russia in the group of five will consolidate this positive trend," Patrushev concluded.
The BRICS countries plan to meet at a summit in Brazil’s Fortaleza in July. Among other issues, the association is planning to discuss Argentina’s candidacy.
Earlier, Indian Ambassador to Argentina Amarenda Khatua who said Buenos Aires was interested in joining BRICS, and three of the group’s five members – India, Brazil and South Africa – supported the idea.
Argentina's foreign minister said Buenos Aires planned to develop its relations with BRICS states, but said it is up to BRICS to decide on the agenda.
MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia would consider any further expansion of NATO forces near its borders a "demonstration of hostile intentions" and would take political and military measures to ensure its own security, a senior diplomat was quoted on Monday as saying.
The comments come amid a deep crisis between Russia and the West over Ukraine and days after U.S. President Barack Obama offered increased military support for eastern European NATO members to ease their concerns over Moscow.
"We cannot see such a build-up of the alliance's military power near the border with Russia as anything else but a demonstration of hostile intentions," Deputy Foreign Minister Vladimir Titov told Interfax in an interview.
Speaking last week in NATO-member Poland, Obama unveiled plans to spend up to $1 billion on supporting and training the armed forces of alliance states bordering Russia.
The White House also said it would review permanent troop deployments in Europe in the light of the Ukraine crisis, but fell short of a firm commitment to put troops on the ground, as sought by Poland as a security guarantee.
"It would be hard to see additional deployment of substantial NATO military forces in central-eastern Europe, even if on a rotational basis, as anything else but a direct violation of provisions of the 1997 Founding Act on relations between Russia and NATO," Titov said. "We will be forced to undertake all necessary political and military measures to reliably safeguard our security." Russia has long opposed NATO's eastward expansion as threatening its own security and says Kiev's plan to associate itself more closely with the West - including with the military alliance and the European Union - has forced it to react. The West accuses Russia of meddling in Ukraine to keep the former Soviet country in its sphere of influences.
China launches a C-602 anti-ship cruise missile. (Photo/PLA Navy)
Most military experts consider China's DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile a major threat to US carriers operating in the Western Pacific, but Zachary Keck, the associate editor of the Tokyo-based Diplomat, has gone further to suggest that the cruise missile is a "real carrier killer."
Citing a new report from the Center for the Study of Chinese Military Affairs at the Institute for National Strategic Studies, Keck said that a key element of the People's Liberation Army's investment in anti-access/area-denial capabilities is the development and deployment of large numbers of highly accurate anti-ship cruise missiles and land-attack cruise missiles on a range of ground, air, and naval platforms.
The report also detailed several advantages of cruise missile against US carriers, with the authors noting that cruise missiles can be launched from land, sea or air-based platforms. Their compact size and limited support requirements allows them to be highly mobile and thus highly survivable when launched from ground-based platforms. With low infrared signature, the authors also stated that it is easier for the cruise missiles to escape detection from enemy missile defense systems.
"The potentially supersonic speed, small radar signature, and very low altitude flight profile of cruise missiles stress air defense systems and airborne surveillance and tracking radars, increasing the likelihood that they will successfully penetrate defenses," the report said.
Meanwhile, China is able to produce cruise missiles cheaply, and the country will be able to stockpile large quantities of them, according to Keck, who cited the report's conclusion that that PLA may be able exploit a quantity over quality approach against the US.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on Sunday criticized Finance Minister Yair Lapid, head of the Yesh Atid party, after the latter gave a speech at the Herzliya Conference in which he called on Israel to resume negotiations with the Palestinian Authority (PA).
In his speech, Lapid said that Israel should freeze construction outside the so-called “settlement blocs” and also added that, ahead of the next stage of negotiations, Israel should “draw a map in which we define the blocs, where we have to freeze construction and where it is possible to reinforce it.”
Reacting to Lapid’s comments, sources close to Netanyahu said Sunday night, "Anyone who has political experience knows that one does not make concessions without receiving anything in return, particularly with a government which includes a terrorist organization that wants to destroy Israel."
"We have seen in Gaza what is the outcome of a unilateral withdrawal,” said the sources, referring to the 2005 Israeli “Disengagement” from Gaza which resulted in endless rocket attacks on southern Israel.
“Any map that is presented would be the starting point of the Palestinian demands," said the sources, who added that Netanyahu "will continue to lead the State of Israel while maintaining the national interests of the citizens of Israel.”
In his speech Sunday, Lapid also strongly attacked Jewish Home Chairman Naftali Bennett’s plan for Israel to annex Area C in Judea and Samaria, describing it as “delusional”.
"Extreme rightist elements are pushing us toward delusional ideas of annexation that will lead us to a disaster known as a bi-national state,” he charged, adding, “I do not know if this is a PR stunt or a genuine intention, but we will not let that happen.”
Deputy Defense Minister and Likud MK Danny Danon blasted the tacit acceptance and continued funding of the newly formed Palestinian Authority administration which now includes Hamas.
"It's not about the money," he told Arutz Sheva on Sunday, "it's an issue of morals."
MK Danon gave an exclusive interview on the News & Call-In Show with Tamar Yonah which airs live three days a week on the Israel National Radio live streaming audio feed.
"I think we are now seeing Hamas becoming stronger," he stated, referring to the terrorist organization which controls Gaza and was previously a bitter rival of Fatah, the party of Palestinian Authority head Mahmoud Abbas. "Unfortunately instead of freezing the approximately $400 million a year, the U.S. Administration is continue this funding."
On June 2nd, United States State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki stated at a press conference, "based on what we know now we intend to work with this government... we continue to believe our assistance to the PA and the Palestinian people are important."
MK Danon retorted: "You can't fight Al-Qaeda and then also sponsor a terrorist organization."
Danon recently returned from a trip to the United States where he spoke at the annual Israel Day Concert in the Park in addition to traveling to Capital Hill in Washington DC.
"I was on the Hill last week and met with many leaders, and I can tell you that it is clear that the 2006 bill that passed Congress clearly states that funds cannot go to terrorism."
One of the stipulations of the bill to which MK Danon referred is "to urge members of the international community to avoid contact with and refrain from financially supporting the terrorist organization Hamas or a Hamas-controlled Palestinian Authority [then only in Gaza - ed.] until Hamas agrees to recognize Israel, renounce violence, disarm, and accept prior agreements, including the Roadmap."
MK Danon added that in the event that the US would pull funding, the PA had other means at their disposal. "Don't be worried about them. They are already organizing a special fund from supporting Arab states."
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman this week offered “full diplomatic relations with the Persian Gulf states” in the context of a regional peace deal involving the Palestinians.
Liberman was expansive in his comments to Ben Caspit:
“Just think about Israel’s technological and scientific know-how joining forces with the Saudi and Gulf financial powerhouses. But the Arab world must come around and understand that it needs to come out of the closet and start talking to us out in the open. I am talking about full diplomatic and commercial ties. The Palestinian problem could be resolved, as could our problem with Arab Israelis.”
Liberman’s initiative taps into a constituency and rationale in Israel for a regionally-based peace effort.
Akiva Eldar writes this week that the Arab Peace Initiative, championed by Saudi Arabia, remains Israel’s best option for peace:
“A far-reaching peace plan presented by the Arab League more than 12 years ago, and more than two years before the unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, is sitting on the government’s doorstep. Israeli soldiers fighting against terrorists who refuse to recognize their right to a state are not war criminals. Israeli politicians who prefer one-sided moves, who perpetuate the conflict instead of ending it, are peace criminals.”
And Mazal Mualem reports on a poll this week, which reveals that while most Israelis are ignorant of the Saudi peace plan, there is the potential for broader support.
Caspit further explains, however, that Liberman’s star turn as peace visionary may be motivated as much by Israeli domestic politics and the Iranian threat as it is by notions of a "new Middle East.
Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanayhu faces a potential governing crisis over his handling of the Palestinian unity agreement and Israel’s sinking ties with the United States, and Liberman may be trying to claim the political center for his eventual own bid for the top job, according to Caspit.
In his speech on June 2, the Israeli foreign minister more than hinted at bringing an end to the now well-reported backroom meetings and contacts between Israeli and Arab security officials for discussions presumably focused on the Islamic Republic, and dealing with the Iranian threat in the open.
Both Israel and Saudi Arabia have been skeptics of the prospects for success of the nuclear talks between world powers and Iran. The stakes of failure are a regional arms race, which is probably already under way. Nawaf Obaid this week presented his outline of a more assertive Saudi defense doctrine. Obaid writes that Riyadh would follow suit if Tehran develops a nuclear weapon:
“Should Iran become a nuclear state, they must follow suit and gain the capacity to defend themselves. As much as one can hope it will not be needed, conceptualizations for such an unpleasant necessity must be part of Saudi future thinking.”
Despite the shared threat from Iran, Caspit sees a catch in Liberman’s logic:
"Liberman ignored one other issue: to wit, that these so-called 'moderate states' on which he is pinning his hopes are playing a double game. Their 'moderateness' notwithstanding, they also fund jihadist organizations such as ISIS (the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham) — a radical Islamic terrorist group that is leading the jihadist forces in the revolt against Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian president. Inflaming the spirit of radical Islam, these groups are very prevalent across the Middle East, with ISIS being the most prominent among them. Hundreds of Muslim-European volunteers flock to them, training and joining the bloody war in Syria (or terrorist activities elsewhere). Should they survive, they go back home. One of those who returned home was the terrorist who probably assassinated four innocent bystanders, including an Israeli couple on vacation, at the Jewish Museum in Brussels on May 24. Someone has to explain to the 'moderates' in the Persian Gulf that fighting Assad cannot justify sliding into terrorism and jihad. Growing to full size, these monsters tend to set themselves free, becoming uncontrollable by that point."
Caspit’s caution on Liberman’s plan might inspire a second thought about the best path to regional security.
Last week, US President Barack Obama described a new approach to global terrorism, including a regionally-based counterterrorism plan for the Middle East involving Syria’s neighbors.
Al-Monitor has written that Liberman is especially well-positioned by his strong ties to Moscow, which holds the keys of influence with Iran and Syria, to position Israel to benefit from discussions on Syria, which would unavoidably lead to a conversation about Hezbollah.
As this column wrote in February:
“A calming of the situation in Syria would have direct consequences for Hezbollah’s role in Lebanon. You can’t solve Lebanon, or Hezbollah, without solving Syria. Gen. Michel Aoun, head of Lebanon’s Free Patriotic Movement and a key broker of the deal this week that allowed formation of a new Lebanese government, began discussions of a plan to assimilate Hezbollah’s forces into the Lebanese army. This deal could be picked up again, at the right time, and might facilitate progress on development of energy reserves in the eastern Mediterranean, where cooperation is stymied in part because Lebanon and Israel do not have relations.”
US Secretary of State John Kerry opened the door to such an approach this week in Beirut when he said, “I call on them — Iran, Russia, and I call on Hezbollah, based right here in Lebanon — to engage in the legitimate effort to bring this war [in Syria] to an end.”
The future of Hezbollah is critical for any lifting, rather than waiving, of US sanctions in the event of a nuclear deal with Iran. For sanctions to be lifted, Iran must no longer be considered a state sponsor of terrorism by the United States. Iran’s relationship with Hezbollah is decisive in that designation.
There is in principle no downside to Israel reaching out to moderate Arab states for discussions of peace and normalization. This is overdue and all to the good. But the key conversation to be had is about the strategic fault line on Israel’s northern flank with Iran, and that means the future of Hezbollah’s role as an ally and instrument of Iran’s strategic intentions. And that conversation requires a channel from Tel Aviv, via Moscow, Beirut and Damascus.
Leftist MKs attacked the settlement enterprise in Israel's Biblical heartland of Judea and Samaria, from the platform of the Herzliya Conference on Sunday.
"The settlement enterprise is a security, financial and moral burden," claimed Justice Minister Tzipi Livni (Hatnua).
Livni added that "the settlement enterprise is built to prevent us from ever reaching a (peace) agreement; the settlement enterprise takes enormous budgets from social issues essential to Israeli society - education, health, social justice in all its levels and varieties."
Opposition and Labor Party Chairman MK Yitzchak Herzog joined the offensive, attacking the erstwhile political alliance between Yesh Atid and Jewish Home. Herzog singled out Housing and Construction Minister Uri Ariel (Jewish Home), who has announced at several junctures new construction plans for Judea and Samaria, to the ire of the American administration and the West at large.
"Whoever give the construction portfolio to the Jewish Home and lets the cat watch over the mice, have lost their right to speak about peace a long time ago," charged Herzog, hinting at Yesh Atid's agreement with Jewish Home to only join the coalition together.
Speaking about Yesh Atid Chairman and Finance Minister Yair Lapid, Herzog went on the attack, saying "Yair Lapid - if you truly want to speak about peace, don't show us theoretical plans wrapped in cellophane, and don't give us virtual solutions."
"Get up, leave the government - it isn't too late, and together we'll build a coalition that will bring Israel to peace," said Herzog.
Lapid at the conference threatened to leave the coalition government if the plans of Economics Minister Naftali Bennett, which were officially presented at the conference, were adopted and Area C of Judea and Samaria was annexed.
Lapid called for a return to peace talks, despite the inclusion of Hamas in the new Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) unity government formed last Monday. He also called for a construction freeze outside of the "settlement blocs."
Sources close to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu slammed Lapid's speech on Sunday, saying "anyone who has political experience knows that one does not make concessions without receiving anything in return, particularly with a government which includes a terrorist organization that wants to destroy Israel."
Welfare Minister Meir Cohen of Lapid's Yesh Atid party went further on Saturday, announcing the party would leave the coalition government if it did not negotiate with the Fatah-Hamas unity government.
Former Israeli National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror gave a pessimistic forecast on Sunday, when he told the annual Herzliya Conference that Israel will “continue to live by the sword” for the foreseeable future.
"During the Third Lebanon War we will have no choice but to strike civilians who live above the rocket launching facilities," he said. ''We’ll have to say it openly, and the world cannot come to us with complaints.”
“You don’t prevent Hezbollah from forming a state within a state, you don’t prevent them from gathering arms and deploying among civilian population, so you cannot blame us when there are civilian casualties. We have shown evidence of this to the UN and the Red Cross and they did not do anything,” said Amidror.
“We will continue to live by the sword even if we do not use it,” he continued, revealing that there are about 50 thousand missiles and rockets in Lebanon, and that Israel has no way to remove this threat.
“The Sudanese threat that focuses on the Sinai Peninsula is another threat [Israel faces],” he said. “Our success in dealing with it in Judea and Samaria is tremendous. We have created a deterrence in Gaza, but it will not last forever,” predicted Amidror.
He said that Israel might ultimately have to be the one to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and added that Israel must also work to destroy Hezbollah’s capability to launch rockets towards it.
"The potential of Iran becoming a nuclear power and not only the realization has to be prevented. This burden could ultimately fall on Israel’s shoulders,” said Amidror. ''It is important to destroy Hezbollah’s infrastructure because Hezbollah is no longer as it once was and it will be difficult for them to rebuild. Failing to prevent Hezbollah from firing rockets at Israeli civilians will result in many casualties,” he warned.
Amidror concluded his speech by rejecting recent reports that Israel was spying on the United States.
“I want to say here on this public stage: Israel does not spy on the United States, this is a baseless and irresponsible claim,” he said.
In December 1998, the Central Committee of the Palestinian National Council convened in Gaza to vote to change those articles of the Palestinian National Covenant that conflicted with the Oslo Accord. The committee was convened at the demand of then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who conditioned the continuation of negotiations and the implementation of the agreements on the covenant being amended officially.
The covenant defined the objective of the PLO as bringing about the end of the Zionist entity through military means. One of the articles that Israel demanded be changed was Article 22, in which the Zionist movement was defined as a political movement associated with imperialism, fascist in its methods, aggressive and racist in nature. Article 33, the final article of the covenant, states: "This Charter shall not be amended save by [vote of] a majority of two-thirds of the total membership of the National Congress of the Palestine Liberation Organization [taken] at a special session convened for that purpose."
The session convened in Gaza in the presence of then-US President Bill Clinton. Most members of the Palestinian National Council, including those defined as “master terrorists,” were allowed by Israel to enter the Gaza Strip for the occasion. Attendees included airline hijacker Leila Khaled and Abu Abbas (Muhammad Zaidan), head of the Palestine Liberation Front (PLF), who oversaw the hijacking of the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro and the murder of an American citizen, Leon Klinghoffer.
Netanyahu, who was elected prime minister in 1996, was not satisfied with the letter that late PLO leader Yasser Arafat had sent to the late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin stating that the PLO recognizes the State of Israel and that the articles of the Palestinian Covenant are “inoperative and no longer valid.” He demanded a legal vote by the Palestinian National Council to amend the covenant. Yet even this symbolic vote, which took place in April of that year, was not enough for Netanyahu, who insisted that the amendment be approved by a two-thirds majority. The reason was obvious. Before he could implement the agreements, which he so vehemently opposed as chairman of the opposition, he had to have a significant public achievement that would somewhat allay the concerns of his supporters, who opposed the agreement. It’s worth noting that, even now, some right-wing circles in Israel claim that the aforementioned articles are still in effect. There was no secret ballot, they say, so the entire vote was invalid.
Netanyahu now finds himself in a similar situation. This time, however, the issue is the Hamas charter. Like the charter of the PLO, it calls for the destruction of Israel, but in much more violent terms.
In an Al-Monitor article on June 4, Erel Segal complained about the Obama administration’s quick decision to recognize the Palestinian unity government, composed of both Fatah and Hamas. “How can [President Barack] Obama reconcile his humanistic values with Article 7 of the Hamas charter, which refers to the war between Muslims and Jews on the Day of Judgment, saying that on that day, the rocks and trees themselves will call out, 'O Muslim! O Servant of Allah! There is a Jew hiding behind me. Come and kill him!'”
Indeed, no one disputes the fact that the Hamas charter is militant, religiously fanatical and racist and that it leaves no room for compromise. It declares that the only way to achieve its goals is through jihad. The charter was released in September 1988, after the start of the first intifada. At the time, the movement’s leaders wanted to prove to the Palestinian public that they were not supported by Israel, so that they would not be condemned as traitors and collaborators. On the other hand, it is also worth noting that the Islamic Center, the body upon which Hamas was built, received aid from the Israel Civil Administration and from then-Defense Minister Rabin. At the time they believed that the “religious people,” as they defined Hamas, would serve as a reasonable partner in dialogue and sane counterweight to the Fatah terrorists in the Gaza Strip.
Yet, for the past decade, Hamas has been undergoing a process of change, dictated by evolving circumstances. As a result, it is moving further and further away from the articles of its own charter. Hamas maintained contacts with Israel to obtain various cease-fires and prisoner exchanges, to propose a hudna (truce) based on the 1967 borders and more. Now Hamas is a partner in a unity government that recognizes the existence of Israel, as well as the principles set by the Quartet and all peace agreements signed in the past.
While Netanyahu may find himself in a situation similar to the one he faced in 1996, there is one important and significant difference: After being elected to his first term as prime minister, he was forced to contend with implementing the Oslo Accord, which he had previously opposed. Now he has to contend with a position that he himself formulated, which regards Hamas as an obstacle to peace and which considers its reconciliation with Fatah to be grounds for imposing sanctions.
In the 2006 election campaign for the Palestinian Authority, the leaders of Hamas did not rule out the possibility of changing various articles in the Hamas charter. Their goal was to be as successful as possible in the first elections in which they participated, and all means were acceptable to achieve that end, especially when various articles in the movement’s rigid charter conflicted with the changing circumstances.
In October 2005, just before the elections, in an interview with former Haaretz journalist Arnon Regular, Hamas co-founder Dr. Mahmoud al-Zahar said, “The Hamas charter is a matter for interpretation. It expresses a political and social position based indirectly on the Quran. … If I were to tell you that the charter could be changed, it would immediately be seen as a concession and the collapse of Hamas’ principles. No one is thinking now about changing the charter, but in principle it is not impossible.”
In another interview with Haaretz, professor Muhammad Azal, then leader of Hamas in Nablus, said that Hamas could change its basic charter and engage Israel in negotiations. “The charter is not a Quran book. Historically, we believe that all of Palestine belongs to the Palestinians, but today we are talking about a new reality and the need for political solutions in a reality that has changed.”
Hamas, like Netanyahu, finds itself today again at the same crossroad. Ever since the movement was founded and its charter was released, its leadership has been treading carefully between the raindrops, looking for a path between an extremist ideology and changing circumstances. It compromised again just now, when it joined forces with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and entered a unity government, which was recognized by Washington. Just as Netanyahu once forced Arafat and Clinton to set out on an amendment journey in Gaza, he can now put the Palestinian government to the test. In so doing, he can stop the surge of international recognition for the new government. The prime minister must demand that Abbas take steps to change the position of Hamas, as a necessary prerequisite to democratic elections in the Palestinian Authority. Given the situation of Hamas today, it can be pushed into a corner, and it is well worth doing so before Israel finds itself in the corner instead.
A senior Hamas spokesman on Sunday reassured Palestinians that the conciliatory language toward Israel coming out of Palestinian unity government talks is all for show, and that ultimately no one recognizes the Jewish state’s right to exist.
Writing on his Facebook page in Arabic, Hamas spokesman Ihab al-Ghussein revealed that “behind closed doors,” even Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, the darling of Western leaders, admitted that remarks in English are to be ignored by the Arab masses.
According to al-Ghussein, Abbas told him and other Palestinian leaders that “when I go out and say that the government is my government and it recognizes ‘Israel’ and so on, fine - these words are meant to trick the Americans.”
The spokesman went on to stress that all media statements coming out of both Gaza and the “West Bank” are meant only for international consumption, and do not reflect the true sentiments in the region.
“Guys, let me (continue) saying what I say to the media. Those words are meant for the Americans and the occupation (i.e., Israel), not for you,” explained al-Ghussein. “What’s important is what we agree on among ourselves. …Don’t harp on everything I tell the media, forget about the statements in the media.”
Hamas has never shied away from telling the truth of the matter, even when it directly contradicted what Abbas and others were telling the Americans and Israel in English.
The problem has always been that Washington and other Western powers are so desperate for a breakthrough in the Middle East peace process that they will gladly make themselves willing fools by swallowing Abbas’ statements, while ignoring Hamas’ revelations.
DF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz said Monday that Russia sends arms supplies to the Syrian army on a weekly basis. “The conventional threat to Israel has slightly diminished,” he said, but “Iran has not given up on its nuclear vision and will cling to it by every means. It is most important to prevent [Iran’s acquisition] of this capability and this can be done, whether by force or without it.” Gantz was lecturing to the Herzliya meeting of the Interdisciplinary Center’s policy and strategy institute.
US dollar and yuan banknotes. (File photo/CNS)
China has experienced a turbulent spring, following a series of violent attacks that took place within its boundaries at an unprecedented frequency, and provocation stemming from its neighbors, including Japan, Vietnam and the Philippines, reports the South Reviews magazine.
The United States is behind these incidents, given its Asia Pivot strategy and its known links with terrorist organizations, threatening stability in China's northwestern region, according to the magazine.
In his address at the fourth Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA), which took place in Shanghai during late May, China's president Xi Jinping's remarks of "opposing one party stirring up confrontation for its own gains" were aimed at the United States, the magazine pointed out.
Although China was widely expected to respond with counter measures, following the Philippines' detention of Chinese fishermen and anti-Chinese riots in Vietnam, Beijing did not do so, since it has a strategy in place to tackle the core issue, according to the magazine.
China has felt the consequences of its earlier decision to accommodate the United States, and Chinese premier Li Keqiang recently brought up the issue during his trip to Africa, calling his country's foreign exchange (forex) reserve of nearly US$4 trillion "a burden."
The forex reserves — the world's largest — has undermined China's currency sovereignty, hampered the country's ability to manage its economy through monetary policies, and subsequently worsened inflation and the property market bubble, the magazine explained.
The first step to counter the United States' global power, the magazine said, is to end the dominance of the US dollar, and China has embarked on the path. Its recent pact with Russia, under which the two countries agreed to use their own currencies to pay for mutual transactions, is a big step in that direction.
Moreover, Xi said during a joint press conference held with Kazakh president Nursultan Nazarbayev after the CICA summit, that Asian countries are capable of handling Asian affairs and would build security in the region by enhancing cooperation.
Following the CICA summit in Shanghai, Xi visited Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, which is in the process of constructing the single-aisle jet C919, and said that China needs to establish its own equipment manufacturing if it wants to be a superpower.
These series of remarks, along with Xi's past comments, reflected China's vision for Asia, which would take care of its economy and security on its own, with China being the engine in the region, according to the magazine.
Therefore, the magazine said it is not unusual that Beijing stayed its hand over the recent confrontations involving its neighbors, since these countries are not seen by China as enemies, but allies in the region.
The magazine also said that the United States' recent indictment of five Chinese military officers, accusing them of cyber espionage, was only a meaningless act of provocation that reflects how Washington still believes it can act as the world's police.