Avigdor Lieberman - From Kingmaker to Deal Breaker

No I am not surprised. Avigdor Lieberman saying I also advocate the creation of a viable Palestinian state is proof he was infected some time ago with the disease of conventionalism. When politicians are on the cusp of power but not sensing victory they grasp for support. Lieberman needed to reach a wider audience to win. The path was to secure the land of Israel loyalists yet also win over those sort of pragmatic folks who don't yet see or understand the nature of the divine in the land of Israel. Lieberman went wobbly - his biography title: From Bar Bouncing to Policy Bouncing.

Lieberman's move was predictable. As a leader of a non-religious party, (also calling for civil marriages) Lieberman is not held to the standard of consistency (to be fair much of the Israeli political world can not be measured by this indicator either- contradiction is the life force that makes Israeli governments). The YNET article below characterizes Lieberman's opinion of the peace process, negotiations and Pali Independence as based upon false assumptions. Then, he was not a kingmaker. Now, he can own the peace process, the prestiege, the White House visits, the constant attention - so it makes sense to him. Today, Lieberman has revised his assumptions. No doubt many of his voters from a mere few weeks ago are revising their own assumptions, wishing they had voted for National Union. And as measured by the world media's own conventional wisdom, I bet many are scratching their heads this morning. (see below)

I could be cynical and conspiracy minded enough to say that Lieberman stands accused with Sharon, Olmert, and Livni of sacrificing the policies of the country and the trust of the voters as leverage for political gains and/or posturing in light of pending criminal investigations. But that maybe going to far. Maybe.

While many in Israel and around the world are questioning Lieberman's inconsistency, Aryeh Eldad, speaking for the frustrated around the world summed it up “Only ostriches and illiterates should be surprised. Throughout the campaign we said that Lieberman is not the true Right.

---

Nationalists Blast Lieberman’s ‘Palestinian State’
Adar 3, 5769, 27 February 09 12:08by Gil Ronen(IsraelNN.com) Yisrael Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman’s article supporting the creation of a ‘Palestinian state’ was ill-received in the nationalist camp, with some accusing Lieberman of deserting his former positions on the subject and carrying out an about-face.

The ‘Mattot Arim’ action committee reacted by saying that had Lieberman made the statements in support of a ‘Palestinian’ state before the elections, “the Yisrael Beiteinu party would have gone down from 15 mandates to 9.” [Yisrael Beiteinu went up to 15 mandates from 12 in the last Knesset. -ed.]

Mattot Arim clainmed that before elections were held, Yisrael Beiteinu gave them a written, clear-cut statement that opposes the establishment of a ‘Palestinian’ state.

The group noted that Lieberman made that commitment public in several ways, including a full-page advertisement in the Jerusalem Post. “In addition, at least three party candidates confirmed before the election that the party opposes a Palestinian state: Danny Ayalon, Uzi Landau and David Rotem,” according to Mattot Arim, which also cited similar statements on the Yisrael Beiteinu website and in the media.

Terror Victims’ group Almagor said that “nothing has improved since Lieberman cooperated with the terror victims on explaining the dangers” of such a solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

MK Aryeh Eldad (NU) said, however, that “Only ostriches and illiterates should be surprised. Throughout the campaign we said that Lieberman is not the true Right. His diplomatic plan includes transferring sovereign parts of the State of Israel to the Palestinian.

---

Hardline populist Lieberman could be surprise kingmaker in Israeli election - hit piece from Guardian

---

Israel election: profile of 'kingmaker' Avigdor Lieberman - Telegraph

Mr Lieberman thinks that what we call the "peace process" has been a mistake from the start. Put simply, Mr Lieberman rejects every facet of President Barack Obama's thinking on the Middle East. When the nationalist leader has real power in Israel, the country could find itself on a collision course with America's new administration.

The Palestinians and their Arab brethren are determined to destroy Israel, he believes. Giving them a state along the 1967 borders that used to contain Israel would only whet their appetite for more.

Instead of leading to a settlement, the peace agreement that America and Europe would foist on Israel would only weaken the Jewish state and embolden its Arab neighbours to fulfil their destiny and eradicate the "Zionist Entity".

"The peace process is based on three false basic assumptions," Mr Lieberman has explained. "That the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the main fact of instability in the Middle East, that the conflict is territorial and not ideological, and that the establishment of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders will end the conflict."

Lieberman: Territorial concession concept failed - YNET

"Israel needs to explain that the demand for an independent Palestinian state and the refugees' right of return is a cover for radical Islam's attempt to destroy the State of Israel," he stated in the document.

Lieberman OpEd - IMRA

The Bush Burned And Olmert Was Consumed

The following is a press release from Americans for a Safe Israel I received by email today. Judging by the headline in today's Jpost, Olmert and Abbas to start negotiations on core issues the long awaited crash of the Olmert regime may finally come to fruition. Bye bye Shas and Yisrael Beitenu. Pres. Bush may leave Israel wondering if he caused his friend Ehud his job.

Click to enlarge

Press Release:

U.S. Evangelical Leaders Reject Palestinian State in Judea and Samaria
in Jerusalem Post Ad Keyed to President Bush’s Arrival in Israel

Jerusalem, 1/8/08 – Proclaiming “an ineradicable bond between the geographical integrity of the land…and God’s promise of the land as “an everlasting possession” to the people of Israel, 26 American Evangelical pastors and lay leaders from 11 states and the District Colombia (plus a Canadian entry from British Columbia), affixed their signatures to a full-page Jerusalem Post ad flatly rejecting President Bush’s Annapolis-launched campaign to shoehorn a “Palestinian State” between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River (see attachment {the above ad, APRPEH}).

Headlined “President Bush: There will be No Legacy” and timed for the President’s January 9-10th visit to Israel, the ad declares the creation of such an entity “detrimental to the stability or both Israel and Jordan, the peace of the Middle East and the security interests of the United States.

The signatories mirror a cross section of some of the most influential voices on the U,S.Evangelical and Pentacostal scene, including, inter alia, national media personality Dr. Michael Evans, chairman of Churches United With Israel in Mr. Bush’s home state of Texas; Tennessee Pastor Robert Upton, a major figure in the powerful Pentacostal Congress; Pastor Jim Vineyard, whose press and internet opposition to Israeli territorial concessions has attracted national attention, and White House backyard neighbors the Rev. James Hutchens of the Jerusalem Connection and Richard Hellman, head of Christians’Israel Public Action Campaign, Capitol Hill’s best known pro-Israel Christian advocacy group.

Herbert Zweibon, chairman of New York-based Americans For A Safe Israel, sponsor of the ad, characterized it as a “reflection of the rising concern among Bible-oriented Christians at the negation of the Covenant, the marginalization of four millennia of Judeo-Christian civilization and the existential and geostrategic peril implicit in any decision to dismember Jerusalem and deliver Judea and Samaria into the hands of a radical Islamic nexus.”

Zweibon said he was awed by the moral courage exhibited by the signatories. “Taking issue with a president they admired and supported was no easy matter for these pastors and their congregants,” he noted, “but as Christians, addressing a professed born-again Christian, they felt obligated to tell the president that pressuring a weak and extremely unpopular Olmert government to place Israel in the direst jeopardy it has ever known was morally, religiously and geopolitically indefensible. We all hope he gets the message.”

End the Olmert Occupation of Israel

PA Demands Kotel as Failed Taba Accords Revived

by Hana Levi Julian

(IsraelNN.com) Israel and the Palestinian Authority have agreed to take a second look at the principles discussed during the January 2001 Taba Summit between then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak and then-Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said this week that he has accepted the principles reached during the negotiations but that had not been formalized in a final document, as a basis for current negotiations, according to an unnamed PA official quoted by the Maariv newspaper.

The source said that the PA has also agreed to the same principles as a basis for talks but has not formulated that in a formal manner.

“The problem is that Olmert has internal opposition from Barak,” said the source referring to the former PM who recently returned to politics and became Defense Minister.

“The gaps between Olmert and Abu Mazen are not large,” he said. “In one-on-one talks with Abu Mazen, Olmert has already agreed to Taba but he has not announced this formally.” He predicted that an agreement of principles would be reached by the time of the Mideast summit scheduled for November 26 in Annapolis, Maryland.

PA “Accepts”, but Demands Jews Throw on ‘Kotel’
PA negotiator Adnan Husseini, a senior advisor the PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, said the PA now accepts the Taba agreement that Arafat turned down six years ago, according to Voice of Israel government radio.

However, he rejected Israeli sovereignty over the Western Wall as well as the Jerusalem neighborhoods of Givat Ze’ev and Ma’aleh Adumim.

Husseini said Thursday night that the Western Wall “is part of Islamic heritage that cannot be given up, and it must be under Muslim control.” He also insisted that the entire Old City belongs to the Muslims.

Abbas earlier had agreed that a land swap would allow Israel to retain sovereignty over the Jewish Quarter and the Western Wall in the Old City.

Summary of Taba Accords:

The concessions by Israel in Taba six years ago included:
• Jerusalem would be designated as an open city, with Israeli sovereignty over the Western Wall and Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem and PA sovereignty over Arab neighborhoods in the city. Each side would define their part of Jerusalem as its capital. The issue of the Temple Mount had not been resolved and the PA has now demanded the Western Wall as well.
• Israel agreed to withdrawal from Judea and Samaria over a 36-month period and withdrawal from the Jordan Valley over an additional 36-month period, to be replaced by an international force. Arafat rejected these ideas.
• Israel proposed handing over blocs of land occupied by Arab residents, and retaining so-called “settlement blocs” within Judea and Samaria.. Arafat rejected this.
• Israel agreed to withdraw from 97 percent of its territory restored in the 1967 Six-Day War. Arafat rejected this too.
• Israel agreed to a limited so-called Right of Return, which would allow some 5,000 foreign Arab descendants of those who fled the country during the 1948 War of Independence. Barak proposed that the Arabs be allowed to immigrate (a) to Israel, (b) to Israeli swapped territory or (c) to the PA state. A second proposal offered to Arafat included (a) rehabilitation and relocation within the current Arab host country or (b) relocation to a third country. Arafat rejected these proposals.
• Both sides agreed to phase out the UNRWA agency that administered internationally-funded programs among the PA population, within five years.
• Both sides agreed the PA state would have sovereignty over its airspace.
• Both sides were willing to make a commitment to fight terror and cooperate on security issues.
• Both sides agreed to abide by United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 and that the June 1967 lines would become the basis for permanent borders between Israel and the new PA state.

background story from One Jerusalem: PA Advisor Wants More Of Jerusalem

---

I guess in the eyes of the main-stream or as Rush calls it the "drive-by media", acceptance of the ridiculous conditions for "peace" set at Taba represents further evidence that the PA is the moderate negotiating partner vis a vis Hamas which would never accept such "limited" conditions.

The provisions of the Taba plan would leave Israel hardly stronger or strategically better off but with an arab terror organization in control of 97% of Samaria, Judea and Gaza (not mentioned directly) including control of the airspace. Why the insistence of maintaining seemingly endless talks with these people raises questions as to the sanity of the Israeli side?

Jerusalem will always be, not a point of contention as the conventional wisdom crowd would have you believe, but a beacon of hope and strength for the Jews. Jerusalem is indeed the single issue which SHOULD unite all Jews and will prevent any major accord with the arabians, unless the arabians give up claims to the Jewish holy city. Organizing to oppose the government's negotiating strategy and to remind these wayward and rebellious Jews that in the words of MBD "Jerusalem is not for sale" is underway drawing heavy weights such as Rav. Elyashiv (see story).

The pali cause, for what its worth will not be advanced when their liars negotiators go one record stating the phony islamic claims to the Kosel or any of Jerusalem for that matter. (see the sidebar link "Islam's Temple Mount").

The Jewish people must unite over the issue of Jerusalem. The Israeli electorate must unite over the disposal of the morally and spiritually failed Olmert government. Shas and Yisroel Beitenu are the empowering and enabling Olmert to continue this reckless abandonment of the land and thereby ancient Jewish dreams and both parties' leaderships should be held accountable.

In closing, here are some comments by the late Lubavitcher Rebbe ZTL, in response to a letter he received from 1970 concerning Jerusalem. Olmert is very lucky he didn't have to contend with the Rebbe.

Jerusalem Is Only For Am Yisrael
November 20, 1970
Brooklyn, N.Y.
Concerning your letter dealing with my words regarding Jerusalem, which were challenged, saying that there is no basis for what I said ... I only wish it were true. But to my sorrow, the present situation clearly refutes the contention that there is no basis for my words. What aggravates this impression is that they (the Israeli Government) are numbing public opinion — with the usual slogans. I warned about this also, and they know that the only thing which is holding them (the Israeli leaders) back now is lack of convincing propaganda, which will satisfy the Jewish masses. Now with regard to the politicians, they have already toyed with many different phraseologies, among them one which I mentioned (they want to turn The City of the Great King[112] into “The City of Three Kings”).

There is presently “no King over the Jewish people, and each man does according to what is right in his eyes,”[113] since we are, after all, living in a democratic society. [They will then decide the issue of Jerusalem] as “three partners,” in order of quantity, of course, which is the deciding factor in a democracy; first come the Christians, then the Muslims, and only then ... (Yesterday, the most important newspaper here, the New York Times, printed the latest approach, which was taken from the words of the Foreign Minister in the name of the Government: “It is the desire of the Israeli Government to retain “political control” over Jerusalem, and not to compromise on places upon which Israel’s security depend, like the Golan Heights and certain other points on the West Bank of the Jordan.” This is sufficient evidence for whoever understands.)

May it be G-d’s Will that in approaching the month of redemption,[114] the month of Kislev, we should be saved — even before the coming of Moshiach — from the modern-day Hellenists.[115] Through the spreading of the wellsprings of Chassidus, which is the central theme of the holiday of redemption Yud-Tes Kislev, each individual will light flames using pure oil, which has not been tampered with by the hand of a stranger, or even lit by one, illuminating both the house and the outside world simultaneously, in an increasing and illuminating manner.


Respectfully, with blessings for true health
and good news in all mentioned here
and with blessings of Mazal Tov
on the birth of your grandchild,
may he live and be well,

/Signed: Menachem Schneerson/