Elliot "Mess" Trips Over a Prostitution Ring!

Ne'eman offers his thoughts regarding Hamas and what Israel should do. Paralells my own thinking. (See 1 below.)

Iraq not the only place where terrorists plant IED's. And Olmert stands mute. (See 2 below.)

Avi Dichter proposes a solution that displays anger more than rational thinking. You cannot expel citizens because they are murderers. (See 3 below.)

Sent to me by one of my memo readers and I have not verified. But it reflects a certain amount of hubris that was verified by Spitzer's downfall today. The arrogance of Spitzer was demonstrated again by his press comment that politics is about ideas and not about people.His prosecutorial power has now boomeranged but he does not even comprehend that it has. I always say you should not drink your own bathwater. If Spitzer survives by not resigning it will be one more indictment against the decline in our values and standards. (See 4 below.)

Stratfor discusses China's concerns about its various ethnics and its significance to the upcoming Olympics. (See 5 below.)

I am biased but our daughter's wedding was great and I believe all enjoyed themselves. Certainly we did.

Dick




1) Closing in on Hamas ?
By Yisrael Ne'eman


Last week’s two day IDF operation in the northern Gaza Strip was a temporary, local, limited success but obviously raised macro questions concerning the overall government objectives in its policies towards the Islamic fundamentalist Hamas. There are those who demand that Israel engage in discussions with Hamas to arrange a “tahadiya” (period of calm) or even a “hudna” (Islamic cease-fire). On the opposing side others demand a full offensive to destroy the Hamas political/terror infrastructure in Gaza. And as usual, until a well thought out, well designed policy is implemented, government decision makers will decide on limited engagements and diplomatic activity to weaken the Hamas as much as possible. This middle road has its ups and downs, but one thing is for sure, there is a continual escalation with each new round of fighting. After U.S Sec. of State Rice’s visit here there is talk of arranging an overall cease-fire just as Israel is said to be planning a major offensive operation into Gaza.

The latest round broke out when five newly trained Palestinian explosives and terror experts were killed when their vehicle was rocketed by the Israeli air force last week. They had received training in Syria, Lebanon and Iran, returning to Gaza to spread their newly acquired knowledge. The Hamas responded by massive rocket attacks against Sderot and the western Negev (as usual) and then added Grad rocket attacks against Ashkelon, a city of 120,000 residents. Israel’s two day operation left 120 Palestinians dead (some 80% actively involved in battling Israel) while two Israeli soldiers and one civilian died.

Hamas has continued with its vows of exterminating Israel (just read the Hamas covenant). In interviews with Hamas activists speaking from Gaza to the Voice of Israel radio station it was made clear that Hamas wants a “tahadiya” and/or “hudna”. Some spoke of five years while others mentioned ten, but all Hamas spokesmen agreed that when it was over Israel was obligated to agree to the Hamas terms or face another round of escalation. In those intervening years we all know the Iranian sponsored Hamas will rearm and retrain as is expected during a “hudna” or Islamic cease-fire. They themselves do not deny it. Many good hearted people in Israel and the West see Hamas only as a Palestinian issue to be solved through compromise and common sense since Hamas does “acknowledge” Israel’s existence. However, Hamas (which is one wing of the international Moslem Brotherhood) is not posturing when they say they will never accept a two-state solution, meaning they fully reject Israel’s right to exist. In World War II the Nazis certainly recognized the existence of Jews, but denied their right to exist. There is little difference. It makes no sense to negotiate the terms of one’s destruction.

The government is preparing for a full-scale invasion of Gaza, or so it seems. To capture the entire Strip will cause quite a few casualties, mostly on the Palestinian side. Furthermore, Israel can be expected to lose the media war (as usual). Hamas will use human shields more than ever. This past week the Israeli public was made aware of the TV broadcasts by Hamas during the weekend conflict when a call was put out for civilians to go to the homes of Hamas activists to act as potential civilian casualties (reported on Channel 1) in an effort to deter Israeli attacks (they know Israel monitors their broadcasts). Ludicrous as it may sound, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak is consulting experts on international and military law in order to know exactly under what circumstances Israel will be allowed to take out the Hamas leadership, terrorists or rockets being firing from heavily packed civilian areas. Knocking out the source of enemy fire was easy in yesteryear, today it is a legal entanglement where the terrorists who hold their own civilians hostage hope to gain immunity from return fire, while the anti-terrorists are condemned for defending themselves. Orwell would be pleased as we have now gone one step behind “double-speak” and “double-think”.

The Hamas continuation of rocket fire into Israel makes its destruction as a terror organization an imperative. Were Hamas only a political party not interested in forcing Islam beyond its borders, Israel and Gaza could live in “an under the table” mutually recognized, non-belligerent, non-peace. This is far from the case. As Likud MK Yuval Steinetz points out, Hamas and Gaza have become a forward Iranian position for raining down rockets on Israel, even worse than Hezbollah. Kadima MK Otniel Schneller agrees but believes Israel must play the diplomatic game as determined by the U.S and European Union. This includes roping Egypt and the “moderate Arab states” into the equation. Steinetz believes Egypt and the “moderates” to be unreliable and that Israel must say no to Rice & Co.

Despite diplomatic initiatives, eventually Israel will need to fully crush Hamas. But is it possible? Several steps must be taken:

* Militarily Israel needs to physically divide up Gaza, holding the open areas between the major urban zones of Gaza City/Jabalya, Khan Yunis and Rafiah while surrounding other smaller population centers. This cuts north-south traffic of men and military supplies. Rockets will still be fired at Israel but spotters can help the air force and ground forces pinpoint the launchers for destruction. Leaflets and Arabic radio broadcasts must explain to the civilian population the dangers of being in the vicinity of anyone firing at Israel since return fire is assured. Every night there must be dozens of incursions, forays, arrests and the destruction of Hamas military installations. This same policy was used in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) to break Yasir Arafat’s terror offensive from 2001 – 04 and proved successful.

* As for the Philadelphi line on the border between Gazan and Egyptian Rafiah it becomes irrelevant since Israel’s military presence between Rafiah and Khan Yunis will halt Palestinian movement northwards from the southern Gaza Strip. Diplomatic pressure must be applied to Egypt by the U.S and European Union to halt terrorists and munitions from arriving in Egyptian Rafiah. This needs to be done west of Egyptian Rafiah inside of Sinai. Hamas with Iranian support is increasingly becoming a strategic threat to Egypt by stirring hopes in the opposition Islamist Moslem Brotherhood, so maybe now Cairo will actually do something.

* For the record Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), his government and the Palestinian Legislature must be presented with the legal responsibilities they have taken upon themselves as elected officials. They can then be expected to fail in any initiative they take. This leaves Israel free to continue military actions.

* Within six months Egypt is to replace the Israeli electricity supply to Gaza. Water must be the next stage along with an arrangement for crossings from Sinai to include civilian supplies only. It has been suggested that the European inspectors be stationed on the Egyptian side of the border.

* How long should Israel stay in a divided up Gaza Strip? Unfortunately it might be a while, but the army should not sit in stationary positions but rather engage in counter terror activities and remain on the move. Only road blocks in the open areas need to be somewhat stationary (they can be moved from place to place at will). The army can move out and then return, if necessary.

* Last but certainly not least, Israel must fight the media war with full explanations concerning the Hamas/Iranian/Hezbollah/Syrian alliance. Excerpts from speeches and writings by leaders of all four entities (Khomeini, Ahmedinajad, Nasrallah, Assad, Mashal, Haniya, etc.) must become well known and in particular the West must become familiar with the Hamas Covenant and its explicit demands for Israel’s destruction and its overt anti-Semitism.


All of the above should significantly cut back on Hamas rocket attacks and attempts at infiltration into Israel while solidifying an anti-Hamas diplomatic front. With much less arms and munitions arriving, Hamas will be greatly weakened even though one should not expect their imminent collapse. Any suggestion of a “hudna” is unacceptable.

Since Israel is at war with Iran and its proxies, government policy must respond in kind.

2) Sgt. Liran Banai, 20, from Ashkelon dies of his wound.

The Givati Brigade sergeant was critically injured on March 8 by a roadside bomb which killed another member of their routine patrol of the Israel-Gaza border outside Kissufim.

Altogether 10 Israelis died last week from Palestinian terrorist attacks.

Hundreds of bombing devices planted by Palestinians are routinely defused on the Gaza-Israel border every month. Some are laid to trap Israel border patrols at the rate of five per day.

3)Expel Palestinian terrorists from Jerusalem, says security minister Dichter

Israel’s internal security minister Avi Dichter commented after a resident of Jerusalem’s Jebal Makaber shot dead eight yeshiva students Thursday that Palestinian terrorists ought to be expelled to Palestinian territory. He intends seeking to amend the law to make this possible because, said the minister, jail is no deterrent to these terrorists.

Jerusalem’s 240,000 Arabs have permanent Israeli residency status and enjoy state social security benefits and medical care as well as freedom of movement in the country.

Dichter also called for the nation to honor the Mercaz Harav yeshiva in its hour of grief and praised the religious Zionist community’s exemplary contribution to national security and advancement.

In an interview Saturday night, the internal security minister declared a third Palestinian “intifada” would not be permitted to erupt. He spoke after a day in which traffic on Israel’s main highways from Tel Aviv to Haifa and Galilee was stoned repeatedly stoned. Last week, an Israeli Arab protest rally took place at Umm Al Fahm under the slogan: “Kill the Jews.” Two municipal workers were rescued from a lynch bomb in Jerusalem last week.

4)Who said it?

1) "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

A. Karl Marx
B. Adolph Hitler
C. Joseph Stalin
D. None of the above

2) "It's time for a new beginning, for an end to government of the few, by the few, and for the few...and to replace it with shared responsibility for shared prosperity."

A. Lenin
B. Mussolini
C. Idi Amin
D. None of the Above

3) "(We)...can't just let business as usual go on, and that means something has to be taken away from some people."

A. Nikita Khrushev
B. Jose f Goebbels
C. Boris Yeltsin
D. None of the above

4) "We have to build a political consensus and that requires people to give up a little bit of their own...in order to create this common ground."

A. Mao Tse Dung
B. Hugo Chavez
C. Kim Jong Il
D. None of the above

5) "I certainly think the free-market has failed."

A. Karl Marx
B. Lenin
C. Molotov
D. None of the above

6) "I think it's time to send a clear message to what has become the most profitable sector in (the) entire economy that they are being watched."

A. Pinochet
B. Milosevic
C. Saddam Hussein
D. None of the above

Answers:

(1) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/29/2004
(2) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 5/29/2007
(3) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(4) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(5) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 6/4/2007
(6) D. None of the above. Statement was made by Hillary Clinton 9/2/2005

5) Geopolitical Diary: Beijing Eyes the Periphery

Chinese media reported on Sunday that air marshals foiled a March 7 attempt to crash a China Southern Airlines plane flying to Beijing from Urumqi in Xinjiang province. The chairman of the Xinjiang regional government, Nur Bekri, said on the sidelines of the ongoing national parliament session in Beijing that some people on the flight had attempted to “create an air disaster.” A spokesperson for China Southern Airlines told the official news agency Xinhua that “it’s up to the police” to determine whether it was a terrorist attack. Chinese media have hinted that the attempted attack was carried out by ethnic Uighur Muslim separatists from Xinjiang.

China has been warning for several years that the biggest threat to the upcoming Olympics — to be held in Beijing later this year — comes from Xinjiang’s Uighur militants, especially the East Turkistan Islamic Movement (ETIM) or other East Turkistan militants. On Sunday, Wang Lequan, the Communist Party chief in Xinjiang, emphasized this threat when he said on the sidelines of the parliament session that in January security forces had smashed a Uighur militant cell in Urumqi that was plotting an attack against the Olympics. Wang added that the government would strike first against the “three evil forces”: terrorists, saboteurs and secessionists.

The coincidental timing of the airline incident and the announcement of the new details from the January raid raises some suspicions. Both come just after Australian tour guides traveling by bus were briefly taken captive by a bomb-wielding local from Xian — an incident that ended when Chinese security forces shot the hijacker. That incident showcased some of the broader security threats present in China — ones Beijing would rather people not focus on ahead of the surge of tourists coming for the Olympics. Rather, Beijing has kept up a steady drumbeat of warnings about militant Islamists from Xinjiang. And China has exploited the Western fear of any Islamist militant threat to avoid criticism for the aggressive security measures being put in place for the Olympics.

The frequency with which Beijing has cried “Uighur” in recent months might have more to do with politics than with a genuine security threat, but it emphasizes the central government’s long-standing concerns with China’s ethnic minorities. China’s core — the home of the Han Chinese who currently rule the country — comprises the area around the three major rivers in the East: the Yellow, Yangtze and Pearl. This fertile area has long provided the food and industry for the various Chinese states that have emerged over the centuries. But this same area, which nurtures a sedentary society, has always been vulnerable to invasion by the various nomadic peoples around it. Thus, over time, China has expanded its borders to absorb a de facto buffer zone — including Tibet, Xinjiang, Manchuria and Inner Mongolia.

These buffer states provided security for China, but also introduced a new security problem for the country: control of the ethnic minorities. Incorporating the buffer zones into China, the central government found itself constantly struggling to maintain control over minority groups that were the majority in their own lands, distant from the core. The central leadership sent military units made up of different ethnicities out to the buffer territories to provide control and security, or carried out transmigration policies, seeking to thin out the percentages of the minority populations.

Despite all of this, the central government never really has integrated the minority populations into the Chinese populace, and lingering prejudices and inequalities have been matched by long-lasting resentments and occasional uprisings. In China, additional ethnicities were added to the country, not primarily by immigration, but rather by conquest of surrounding territories — and these ethnicities were never assimilated into a greater Chinese culture. (This is in stark contrast to the United States, where immigration brought in new minority populations which were steadily blended into an American identity.)

This lack of integration has left the core of China with a constant sense of insecurity that continues to be reflected today in its national policies. It also leaves China less concerned overall about security threats from abroad than about domestic ones — whether they are real or imagined.