Schlaglicht Israel Nr. 10/12 Aktuelles aus israelischen Tageszeitungen 1. Juni – 15. Juni 2012 1. Ulpana-Debatte Das Oberste Gericht hatte den Abbruch von fünf Wohnhäusern in der Nachbarschaft Ulpana in der Westbank-Siedlung Beit El angeordnet, weil diese illegal auf Land gebaut worden seien, das einem Palästinenser gehöre. Daraufhin hatten einige Parteien der Regierungskoalition einen Gesetzentwurf der Partei Habayit Hayehud(„Jewish Home“) unterstützt, der den Abbruch der Häuser durch nachtragliche Legalisierung verhindern sollte. Der Gesetzentwurf(„Settlement Regulation Bill“) beinhaltet, dass jeder Besitzer von Land in der Westbank das Recht verliert, nach dem Verstreichen eines Zeitraums von vier Jahren noch gegen Bauvorhaben auf dem jeweils betroffenen Stück Land vorzugehen. Premier Netanyahu positionierte sich gegen das Gesetz und drohte Mitgliedern seines Kabinetts sogar mit deren Entlassung, wenn sie dem Gesetz in der Knesset zustimmen sollten. Gleichzeitig kündigte Netanyahu an, die UlpanaWohnhäuser in den Bereich einer militärischen Zone in Beit El versetzen zu wollen,. The Ulpana saga „Like the dozens of MKs who have come to their defense, we cannot help but feel sympathy for the Ulpana residents.(…) Under different circumstances, a compromise could have been reached. The most equitable solution would have been to handsomely compensate the Palestinian landowner, providing him with an alternative plot of land on which he could actually build. But agreeing to reach such a compromise would immediately label the Palestinian a traitor in the eyes of his fellow Palestinians. Instead, he must insist on taking possession of land so close to Beit El that he will be unable to use it.(…) retroactively“koshering” outposts like the Ulpana neighborhood is not the answer. True, in principle the government has the right to expropriate land in the State of Israel. But it also has an obligation to protect individual property rights.(…) Some of the most talented, best educated, most patriotic Israeli citizens established settlements in Judea and Samaria in the fast fourand-a-half decades. And it is only natural that our lawmakers have a desire to protect the Jewish settlements. But passing the outpost law will only spark yet another conflict between the Supreme Court and the Knesset and pit liberal- minded Israelis against their more nationalist brethren. Israel will be subjected to international condemnation and a renewed effort will be launched to delegitimize the entire settlement project.“If you grab too much,” says a Talmudic adage,“you risk losing it all.” JPO, Editorial, 3.6.2012 Time to take a stand „A bloody debate has raged in present-day Israel between proponents of the settlement enterprise and its opponents, but the current government is nearly unanimous on the issue. So how is it that a conservative government, led by Likud, is once again uprooting communities? Let us recall that the Likud already fell apart once, to the joy of the media and the Left, and gave birth to Kadima, a political mutation that facilitated the destruction of the Jewish communities in Gaza and brought two pointless wars upon us. Without realizing it, we have grown accustomed to the demolition of Jewish homes, here a house, there a street, and finally an entire enterprise. Remember Gush Katif? That cannot be allowed to happen again. There are moments in history when a certain act deviates far beyond its physical bounds. It is not five buildings that are going to be demolished in the Ulpana neighborhood. What will ultimately be destroyed is the very principle of standing up to protect our simple, natural right – which has been upheld by the Law of Nations, by morality and by history – to settle our 1

homeland. This principle allows us to defend ourselves from the Iranian threat, and the European economic threat that wants to drown us. It is not too late.“ IHY, Dror Eydar, 4.6.2012 Netanyahu 1, settlers 0 „Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s victory in the vote on the settlement regularization bill is not just a numerical win. It was also a moral win, because he taught the settlers an important lesson on the limits of power. The masters of the land were beaten and defeated Wednesday. In the battle between king Bibi and the masters of the land, the king won, big time. (…) Despite the settlers’ brutal campaign, and despite what appeared to be a certain victory only weeks ago, they failed in achieving all of their objectives.(...) Netanyahu’s achievement has to do not only with his ability to avert a problematic law, but also with putting the settlers in their place with this vote.(...) The Right may dominate the Likud convention, but at the Knesset and even within the Likud faction there is only one ruler, and it’s not Feiglin. It’s Netanyahu.(…) The zigzags, hesitation and winks that characterized him at the beginning of his current term in office grew fewer the more established his position became. The lack of confidence and urge to survive, which were the motive for all his moves, were replaced by confidence and a sense of power. Kadima’s addition to the coalition was the final stamp and decided who the master of the house is. The vote on the settlement regularization bill, which ended this week with a grand victory for Netanyahu’s position, merely boosts the claim that all one needs to do is show leadership.“ JED, Sima Kadmon, 7.6.2012 A lose-lose situation „Supporters of the demolition believe that destroying these homes is necessary to alleviate criticism from the international community. Nothing could be further from reality.(…) What many forget is that Israel legally, morally and equitably conquered the land in 1967, property that was initially partitioned by the international community decades earlier to be part of a Jewish national homeland before Jordan’s illegal occupation. These people similarly forget that the Oslo Accords, signed with Yasser Arafat in the presence of international officials and diplomats, designated the lands on which Jewish communities like Beit El were built as“Area C,” areas under full Israeli control. Knocking down these five buildings in Ulpana is unlikely to alleviate pressure from the international community. Instead, destroying Jewish homes in our homeland will only encourage the international community to continue its push to undo what is perceives as the historical wrong created when the Jewish people exercised its rights to its ancestral land. For the international community, destroying these homes is not meant to resolve a problem – once and for all – but rather to chip away at the deep meaning that Jews attribute to archaeological findings and use to tie their homes to their forefathers.(...) Solid archaeological evidence, which most Israelis have never explored, demonstrates that for more than 2,000 years this mountain was considered the site of Jacob’s dream in which angels ascended and descended the famous ladder.“ IHY, Alex Traiman, 7.6.2012 There is no salvation army in Judea and Samaria „There is no reason to identify with the pain of the settlers because they – both as individuals and as an organized group- never identified with any pain or distress of others in Israeli society other than that of themselves. The settlers are one of the most egocentric groups in Israel; they worry only about themselves and their own narrow interests, and to hell with everyone else. They have devoted their lives and their struggle to establishing and perpetuating the occupation, and to this alone. Some of them are greedy for real estate, some of them are messianic, and they have hardly raised their voices about any other issue.(...) There is no salvation army in Judea and Samaria.(…) You will not find settlers in any place connected with human compassion or social assistance, volunteering to help others and coming to the aid of the weak. They are too busy with the struggle for the Land of Israel. It is surprising how this energetic group avoids taking part in any issue that does not relate to it. It is surprising how this organized and well-established group does not give of itself and of its resources to those who are not part of its ranks. Even combat service in the Israel Defense Forces, where the settlers are playing an ever increasing role, is aimed at furthering their own interests. It is most surprising that the settlers are considered to have"values" – and not merely in their own eyes. And they have a nerve now to ask for compassion and solidarity from those with whom they never identified nor felt anything for. They are not worthy of this.“ HAA, Gideon Levy, 10.6.2012 2. Syrien Das äußerst gewaltsame militärische Vorgehen des syrischen Präsidenten Assad gegen Oppositionelle im eigenen Land beschäftigt weiterhin die israelischen Kommentatoren; vor allem im Hinblick 2

darauf, welche Optionen die internationale Gemeinschaft überhaupt hat, von außen befriedend einzugreifen. Containing Syria „Admittedly, there are no easy solutions. A military option in Syria would be complicated for a number of reasons. Unlike in Libya, the opposition, though growing, is too weak and divided to forcefully overthrow Assad. Arming the Free Syria Army might only encourage the Assad regime to do away with the few restraints still imposed on the armed forces. Imposing a no-fly zone is irrelevant since Assad’s forces do not need control of the air to rule, and all sides in the conflict are intertwined in areas with heavy civilian populations, which makes the use of air strikes to enforce“safe areas” highly impractical. Russia, which maintains in Syria its only military base outside the former Soviet Union, and China have consistently opposed military action in the UN Security Council. As a result, the US would have a difficult time garnering international support for a military endeavor that is likely to fail. Still, there is real danger that loose weaponry and WMDs might fall into the wrong hands, endangering not just Israel’s security, but the security and stability of the entire region. Therefore, alongside sanctions and strenuous diplomatic efforts – such as additional attempts, backed by China and Russia, to reenforce a cease-fire while providing support where possible to the saner elements in the opposition movement – more efforts need to be made to locate Syria’s WMD caches. If they cannot be destroyed, they should at the very least be contained. The safety of many people depends on it.“ JPO, Editorial, 4.6.2012 Syria atrocities to go on „Indeed, all the talk about Assad’s de-legitimacy is meaningless as long as the Chinese, the Russians, the Iranians and the Lebanese think he’s legitimate. He also maintains his legitimacy for now in large sectors of Syrian society. So the US State Department publicizes yet another plan referring to the need to invoke the UN’s Chapter 7 and accuse Assad of undermining the global order. Big deal. The Americans are talking about 3,000 monitors – instead of the current 300 – who would also engage in enforcement. They are again talking about buffer zones along the Syrian border and about humanitarian corridors deep in Syria to be protected by gunships. For the time being, it’s all talk. So what did we have in Syria this week? Two brutal massacres, more horrific pictures, and a meeting of world leaders in Turkey that produced numerous declarations on the Syrian question and zero actions. We’ll see you in the next massacre. Under this state of affairs, President Assad can survive for a long time.“ JED, Alex Fishman, 8.6.2012 The Syrian conundrum „As long as Assad feels sufficiently secure in his internal support from ethnic and sectarian minorities (Alawites and Druse) and external backing from Russian and Iran(and to a certain extent China), he will have no incentive to stop using violence and murder to cow the Syrian opposition into submission. Therefore, ever more stringent economic sanctions against Damascus – that would indirectly hurt Russia, Iran and China – seem to be the only option. In addition to the bans already imposed by western countries on imports of Syrian oil and on new foreign investment in Syria, and the freezing of Assad’s and his cronies’ assets, additional steps need to be taken to cut off Syria altogether from international capital flows. There are no easy solutions in Syria. But doing nothing at all is not an option.“ JPO, Editorial,10.6.2012 Syria is in civil war „In several respects, the Syrian civil war is the Spanish Civil War of our time. It is an exhibition match between two ideological rivals – Shia Islamism and Sunni Islamism – that cannot co-exist. It is a testing ground for the conflicts to come. Yet it is also not a simple battle of good against evil. The Syrian regime is certainly evil, but the rebels are a mixed bag. The best elements deserve the outside world’s support. Yet the democratic outside world is, for all practical purposes, standing passive.(…) Why stand and watch while the Iranian- Syrian bloc, determined to destabilize the region and destroy US interests, crushes those who want democracy? Why stand and watch(and even help!) while the Muslim Brotherhood and Turkey, determined to foment Islamist revolution and destroy US interests, seize control of the opposition and seek to impose a new and equally ferocious dictatorship on Syria? Yes, despite all the smug“pro-democracy” rhetoric coming out of the Obama administration and others, nobody is helping the moderates who are doomed either to being crushed by the repressive regime or being overwhelmed by the totalitarians on their own side. This is a tragedy but it is a tragedy in which passivity is as powerful a force as is evil. That the Obama administration is mouthing platitudes about human rights and supporting democracy makes the situation altogether more sickening. When the dictatorship defeats the opposition and hundreds of people are massacred or, albeit less likely but 3

possible, if the Islamists turn Syria into another totalitarian regime in an alliance to destroy Western interests in the region, let’s have no doubt who is also responsible.“ JPO, Barry Rubin, 10.6.2012 America's interest in Syria is Israel „Presumably, Syria's disintegration – like Iraq's – will not only bring about the destruction of the ancient mosaic of religions, sects and cultures. Not only museums will go up in flames. It will bring bands of savages. Just like it did in Iraq. But in Iraq's case, their barrels did not reach the petrochemical plants in Haifa Bay. Against whom exactly will Israel retaliate for missiles from Syria? Against those who in any case will lay bombs in the neighborhoods of Damascus? Or will it again expand its borders"to move the cannons further away?" If Syria falls apart, our life will change – in the short run of course. That's why the United States is in no hurry to intervene. It is not interested in Syria's future, nor in the ancient European hypocrisy. Rather, it is concerned for the Israeli fortress' fate. It's looking for an effective dictatorship. Not another"Iraqi democracy." Meanwhile, let them bleed.“ HAA, Yitzhak Laor, 12.6.2012 A deafening silence „It's crystal clear that the Syrian tragedy has serious pan-Arab ramifications. It is taking all meaning out of concepts such as Arab unity, Arab solidarity and the idea that the contemporary Arab world accords any real meaning to human rights. But the Syrian tragedy has serious ramifications for Israel's antiZionist community as well. The inability of this community to directly confront Arab evil undermines the moral basis for its battle against Israeli evil. Its unwillingness to demand that universal values be upheld in Hama and in Homs pulls the rug out from under its demands that universal values be upheld in Ramallah and Nazareth. Its silence when faced with the butcher of Damascus makes its condemnations of the State of Israel sound hollow. The Syrian challenge is a moral challenge.(…) Israeli Arab artists in Israel and Jewish radicals in Israel are silent about what's going on just over the border. This troublesome silence makes one wonder if their declared humanitarianism is authentic. When they spoke up- against Israel- about human dignity and freedom, perhaps they were simply fooling us? Communism in the West was destroyed in the 1950s because it tolerated Stalin's bloody dictatorship. Tolerance in the face of Assad's bloody murderousness is liable to have the same effect on Arab-Jewish radicalism in Israel.“ HAA, Ari Shavit, 14.6.2012 Syria and the decline of the UN “There are two lessons for Israel from the international response to the Syrian crisis. First, the behavior of the U.N. proves yet again that Israel must never compromise its doctrine of self-reliance when its own security is at stake by relying on the protection of international forces. A second lesson is how Israel should relate to the constant criticism it receives from various U.N. Bodies.(...) The U.N. raises expectations that it will offer effective protection to people facing extermination, and in the end does nothing to stop repeated cases of aggression against them, frequently with its forces standing by while innocents are killed. If the U.N. is a paralyzed body that cannot take decisions about cases of genocide, treating aggressors and their victims equivalently, then why should Israel listen to its moral judgments about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? What can a U.N. with such glaring defects tell Israel about Gaza? Who exactly are its international civil servants who issue statements about Israel? Indeed, the Syrian crisis is just the latest example of how the U.N. has lost the moral authority it had when it was founded. Israel must internalize the change in the U.N.'s status the next time a U.N. official decides to issue another politicized"condemnation" about its actions.” IHY, Dore Gold, 15.6.2012 3 . Medienquerschnitt Die Vielfalt der in Israel relevanten Themen kann in einem Medienspiegel nicht umfassend wiedergegeben werden. Um den deutschen LeserInnen dennoch einen Einblick in das breite Themenspektrum, das in den Medien behandelt wird, zu gewähren, veröffentlichen wir in dieser Schlaglichtausgabe wieder eine kleine Auswahl an weiteren Themen, die in den vergangenen zwei Wochen die israelische Gesellschaft bewegten. Über die Bewertung des Ersten Libanonkrieges 1982, und die Lehren, die 30 Jahre später daraus zu ziehen seien. An ongoing addiction „It should be recalled that one of the first Lebanon war's amorphous goals, according to then-Prime Minister Menachem Begin, was to heal the trauma of the Yom Kippur War. Even the date on which the 1982 war of choice started – almost the exact day of the month that the Six-Day War began – seemed to be linked, consciously or unconsciously, to that great, redeeming victory. It was a victory"fast, strong and elegant" that since 1967 has never 4

ceased to mesmerize Israel and its leaders and cause them to long for its return. It goes without saying that that same sweeping victory was never recreated in any of the operations or wars that came afterward.(…) It suffices to recall the long-term failures and complications of the first Lebanon war, and the damage from the operations and wars that came afterward, to wean us from the longing for a lightning-quick operation, a glorious military campaign that would solve all our problems in one fell swoop. Israel needs all the military power it can muster, but the use of force must be wise and cautious, and a last resort. Experience proves that Israel was severely burned every time it got triggerhappy. But the deliberate diplomatic freeze and our demonstrative readiness for war even today, along with the almost messianic longings for an"attack on Iran," shows that we have not yet been weaned from this old, bad habit.“ HAA, Editiorial, 8.6.2012 Waging war on war „From a sociological perspective, the First Lebanon War(...) defined the complex relationship between left-wing Israelis and kibbutz residents and the army. It led to a motivational crisis and to their departure from the army, which in turn sparked an awakening among the national religious sector. Strategically, that is when the"post-modern combat doctrine" was formed – the one that prefers sterile war that can be won through air power and that removes soldiers from the battlefield. This type of war forbids contact with the enemy and avoids ground victory, setting a precedent for future conflicts. Over time, these limitations only worsened, and increasingly harmed the army's capabilities. They reshaped the army into one that requires not just military directives and the deployment of forces, but also requires political considerations and coalitions – which transformed the army into a political playground for Israel's citizens. Everyone is in on the game: human rights groups and feminist organizations, conscientious objectors and parents' associations. The army has become a model for parity between various sectors of society, but it remains to be seen whether it can win wars.“ IHY, Udi Lebel, 7.6.2012 Über den angemessenen Umgang mit illegalen Migranten, von denen in den vergangenen Tagen bereits viele verhaftet wurden, um sie vor der Abschiebung in Gefängnissen zu verwahren. Mass imprisonment „Instead of examining each migrant's status and eligibility, Israel is planning to jail them all. Instead of finally formulating a policy on immigration, Israel is throwing the migrants in jail without giving any of them, and especially the refugees among them, a reasonable chance of gaining asylum. The flood of migrants from Africa is a worldwide problem. Israel should participate in solving it – and not merely by brutal, sweeping measures. Even as politicians vie with one another over who can inflame anti-migrant sentiment more, and as acts of violence(…) grow steadily more severe, the government isn't taking a single positive step to solve the problem. A portion of these migrants to Israel should be given basic rights and allowed to work and live a decent life until the situation in their own countries improves. Israel is capable of absorbing them. Of course, Israel must also control the flow of migrants over its borders. But even so, the state can't ignore the refugees from war who are knocking at its gates, and certainly not those who are already living here. Incitement, hatemongering and mass detentions won't solve anything.“ HAA, Editorial, 5.6.2012 Yishai's plan deserves a chance „My unverified impression is that there is a high rate of correspondence between those people who oppose sending infiltrators back to their homelands and those who vehemently support the expulsion of Jews from their homes in Beit El, and even those who from the bottom of their hearts burst with support for the right of return for the descendents of Palestinian refugees. What if, at the very least, the infiltrators stay in Israel and people try to bring them closer to Israeli heritage and the culture of the Jewish people. People will talk to the infiltrators about becoming part of the Jewish people. Absolutely not by force, of course, but by their free will and without harassment or seduction. Would this solution be acceptable to those people who argue for the infiltrators? Can we make this an organized effort? What if a citizen security force was organized to ensure security and order to protect the peace and serenity of the residents of south Tel Aviv? This is also probably unacceptable. With these conditions, it appears that the policy of expulsion that Interior Minister Eli Yishai is trying to implement is actually a relatively proportional and practical solution. Anything more than his policy would be disgusting incitement. But anything less would be a government of all talk and no action. It is not yet clear if Yishai will succeed. How can he balance between the expulsion of parents and humanitarian treatment for their children? But it is clear that his new plan deserves a chance. In a few months, for better or for worse, the experiment will produce results.“ IHY, Dan Margalit, 13.6.2012 5

Über den erfolgreichen Protest von HolocaustÜberlebenden gegen ein, wenn auch nicht öffentlich sondern privat organisiertes und finanziertes abendfüllendes Konzert allein mit Werken von Richard Wagner im Auditorium der Universität von Tel Aviv. Wagner can wait „Wagner was one of modern history's biggest antiSemites. He didn't just hate Jews, he systematically worked at it and wrote about it, especially in his chilling essay"Judaism in Music," published in 1850. Wagner viewed the influence of Jews on German culture as a catastrophe. Hitler was inspired by him, and his music often accompanied Jews totheir deaths at the hands of Nazis. That is why many Holocaust survivors – but not just them – get chills when they hear his operas and vehemently oppose concerts showcasing his work.(…) anyone who likes Wagner can consume his music not only abroad but also through the countless television music channels, CDs and radio. I am not taking an ideological, moral stand against those who would insist on staging this concert. My objection is emotional: I feel that going ahead with this concert would be an unnecessary act of defiance. Those who play Wagner in Tel Aviv aren't contributing to freedom of expression or universal values or to individual rights. They are only doing something that could annoy good people, even if they don't believe the objection is justified. This concert can be postponed 20 years. There's no rush.“ IHY, Yossi Beilin, 5.6.2012 One more reason to boycott Wagner „The argument that Wagner's music elevates every soul is nullified in the face of the inspiration that the composer gave Hitler.(…) Central motifs from Wagner's operas influenced Hitler's propaganda and public speaking: the unification of the German people, the continuation of its history and defining characteristics, and Nazism as a natural progression of, and means of extending, this history. Those who insist upon performing Wagner's work in official venues and frameworks – for there is nothing to prevent playing or listening to him in a private place – repeatedly try to enlist to the cause the case of Zionist visionary Benjamin Ze'ev Herzl, reminding us that he listened to Wagner's Tannhauser opera when he wrote"The Jewish State." Indeed, Herzl recognized that the work granted him strength as he wrote. But Wagner's apologists forget that the student union that Herzl belonged to held a memorial service for the composer in which antiSemitic speeches were made, and Herzl left in a rage. His close friend committed suicide after he was expelled from its ranks. May Herzl rest in peace. Another thing: the survivors are not a negligible minority. They still number over 200,000 and along with their families, over a million. The official ban on playing Wagner's works is the last symbol of the boycott against Nazi Germany – the entity that planned and carried out the Holocaust. Culture is not about just listening to music; culture is first and foremost the consideration of others. Our present culture is based in part on understanding the past, and that is no negligible argument.“ HAA, Dina Porat, 12.6.2012 Medien: HAA= Haaretz JED= Jedioth Ahronoth JPO= Jerusalem Post IHY= Israel HaYom GLO= Globes AS= Arutz Sheva Veröffentlicht am: 17. Juni 2012 Verantwortlich: Dr. Ralf Hexel, Leiter der FriedrichEbert-Stiftung Israel Redaktion: Anita Hariv, Andrea König Homepage: www.fes.org.il Email: fes@fes.org.il 6