The situation around Iran

With the adoption of oil embargo against Iran the EU has raised the stakes even further in the Western standoff with Iran. This action, which probably is bound to have more negative effect on ailing European economy than  Iran, is hardly a sensible step if one is after coercing Iran into stopping its nuclear development. To begin with these sanction failed measurably in the past,  especially in Iraq, where the brunt of these sanctions fell on the civilian population. Secondly, in recent years Iran has acquired vast currency reserves due to the high prices on oil and gas. It will take many years before these sanction will have biting effect, especially given the reluctance of Iran's main partners China, India, South Africa and Turkey, to take part in the embargo. So why then has the EU undertaken this apparently self-defeating decision? I think the EU knows that the effect of the embargo is going to be short-term anyway, since the main Western antagonists of this drama have already chosen the path of war.

Israel is undoubtedly interested in thoroughly defeating Iran. Indeed, if Iran decided to stop its nuclear work Israel would have been the loser, because the  Iran's role in the region, although enhanced by its nuclear advances, relies primarily on the influence it wields among the resistance groups in Palestine, Lebanon, Shia groups in the Arab countries and Syria. From the Israeli perspective, the most desired outcome would be a complete drying up of the financial and military assistance provided by Iran to its allies. This would be feasible only as the result of a serious military defeat suffered by Iran. Hence Israel is interested in waging a war against Iran even more than it is interested in cessation of its nuclear program and it is prepared to pay for that a substantial price in terms of military and civilian losses.

As much as Israel wants to fight Iran it cannot currently start the war. The first reason is that such a thorough defeat of Iran is hardly possible through the use of air force alone. The deficiency of over-relying on  air superiority has been demonstrated in the last Lebanon war of 2006, when Hezbollah guerilla group could frustrate Israel just by staying put. Although it is probable that Israeli air force is capable of overcoming the Iranian air force and anti-air defenses, it still would have pay a very hard price for a very humble achievement. Besides Israel acting alone would have to overcome serious logistic problem of fighting a war with a country separated by at least two sovereign states. In short, Israel would need the support of its NATO allies, primarily the US.

Such support, either military or otherwise, would have been gravely endangered should Israel be the first to attack. In addition, this action would be censured or even actively opposed by the neutral, but Iran-leaning countries like Russia, China and possibly India. Finally it would also exacerbate the anti-Israeli sentiment among the people of Muslim countries, which may have farther negative outcome on the stability of the region. All this reasons will prevent Israel from initiating the attack.

The US itself seems to be eager to flex its muscles once more. It conveniently evacuated its military, but not para-military forces from Iraq and amassed very impressive naval forces in the Gulf. It has a lot at stake at this conflict. Firstly, it needs to prop up the failing fortunes of its allies in the area, including Israel and the Gulf states; secondly, in periods of financial insecurity the power of manipulating oil reach countries become almost a necessity. There is also a personal revenge matter: though there are countries that have bloodied American nose more than Iran, there is no country that has done it with such a gratuitousness and in-your-face manner. Finally, without dealing with Iran, the war in Iraq will go down in history as the horrendous miscalculation, something that the US can ill afford. Yet as well as Israel, the US finds it difficult both for the internal and the external reasons to initiate this conflict.

On the other side there is Iran, which definitely does not want to go to war. It has most to lose in the event of war and least to gain. Supported by its oil revenues and emboldened by its success in crushing the decent it has acquired a status of regional super-power and if left to its own devices it will most assuredly gain more clout in the coming years with its enemies crumbling from inside in the waves of Arab revolutions. It gambled in its opposition to the Western demands and took a position which leaves it with little place for maneuver. The Iranian bet is that no matter what the West will not dare to attack.

This Iranian self-assurance seems to be a miscalculation. It's true that the West is reluctant to initiate the conflict, but it's also true that the Iranian uncompromising stance represents the tool for the West to manipulate Iran into initiating the conflict by some ill-advised action or suffer a series of humiliating and potentially debilitating measures.  The recent decision by the EU is designed either provoke Iran into some kind of retaliatory response, e.g. closing the strait of Hormuz, which would certainly invite a crushing response or appear weak and incapable of following through its earlier belligerent language.

All in all, the unfortunate conflict seems to be almost unavoidable, since it's hard to assume that the stronger side (the West) will give up and that the weaker side (Iran) will come to its senses.

I am very happy that an Israeli scientist has been awarded the prestigious Nobel price. It makes me proud to be an Israeli too. This makes me also wonder what was so special thirty years ago that allowed Israel to collect several of these awards during the last decade. I decided to make a little comparison of the state of the Israel's science today and thirty years ago. I used Scopus  research engine, a pretty exhaustive source of scientific citations, to see how many papers associated with Israeli institutions have been published in the last 30 days and compared this number with one-month worth of publications in 1980 in Israel and other leading countries. In order to provide a fair comparison with other countries and between different time points I divided the numbers by the population size so the results below represent a monthly number of publications per 1 million inhabitants.

To see the citation tables for 2011 and 1980 press here


These results show that Israel is loosing it's place as a leader of the scientific community. Although, in terms of the number of publications, Israel is still comparable with an average European country, the trend is worrisome. Israel retreated from a position of the "light upon the nations" to mediocrity. In 30 years it has increased its scientific outputs by several hundred percents, while the leading nations have done so by thousand percents, leaving Israel far behind.

However, the real increase in the scientific productivity is not reflected in these numbers. It comes from the developing countries that have, for now, a comparatively low per capita contribution. However, in gross numbers these countries are fast becoming the next powerhouses of science. China's scientific output is only marginally smaller than that of the US and is far ahead of any other country. No doubt it will soon overtake the US as being a leading publisher of the scientific papers. Other developing countries, such as Turkey and Iran, are growing constantly. In terms of the total number of publications they have overcome Israel several years ago and will soon overcome even larger Western nations.

This all means that to stay relevant Israel should increase amount of resource and the efficiency of their use. Otherwise very soon the technological edge will be in other people's hands. Judging by the state of the Israeli science today, this Nobel flourishing of the Israel's science may very well be its Indian summer. 

One should not underestimate the significance of what has occurred in the last couple of days: Israeli civilians have been murdered and Israeli ministers had reasons better than ever to grind Gaza to dust yet again. However it did not happen. What did happen was amazingly measured, according to the standards of the Israel's not too scrupulous practice of dealing with its neighbours, perfectly justifiable, local and accurate hit at the heads of the military wing of the organization known (or assumed) to be responsible. While some country may still raise their brows or at any rate consider it perfectly normal, Israelis right now have the feeling that they have been throughly duped. Indeed, Kadima, famous both for being left wing opposition to the government and for starting two bloody and very damaging for Israel wars against Gaza and Lebanon, adopted a usual for the Israeli leaders stance of calling for yet more punitive actions against Gaza. Only the Likud government headed by ferocious Bibi has got itself in this mess of self restrain.

So what is the meaning of this new policy and what are its ramifications? On the surface it is make no sense. Of course Israel has saved itself from yet another round of senseless bloodletting with the usual finale of international opprobrium. It has quite probably saved the lives of several (or several dozens) of young Israelis. On the other hand it failed to refocus country's attention to the problem of security at the expense of social issues. I don't tend to assume that Bibi or Barak have grown any conscience. For such a conclusion much more serious evidence is needed. Currently, the only thing that comes to mind is that finally some of the Arab spring effects kick in somewhere in the vicinity of Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. Not completely, but to the point when troubled Israelis are bound to take heed.

In fact, may be a tragic miscalculation on Israel's behalf of proceeding to attack the terrorists on the territory of sovereign and wary nation of Egypt has forced Egyptian to take some measures, which ultimately made Israelis reluctant to burn the bridges. May be it was the Americans who suggested that Israel owes them something and it's time to put some of it back. Maybe it's Turkey whose sheer schadenfreude in watching Israel loosing one partner after another has made Lieberman slightly more cautious. Whatever the reasons, the impression is that Israel at least in principle can forgo the policy of righteous “they had it coming” in favour of “are we going to be better off”.

Three dozens prominent Israeli rabbis supported a ruling forbidding the Jews to sell or rent their homes to gentiles. The ruling itself should not be seen as a great surprise. Anyone even superficially familiar with the spirit of the mainstream Jewish religious establishment in Israel, would agree that this was only too expected. Really, the particularism (sorry for the euphemism), of the Jewish faith is so glaring that in some countries people started filing lawsuits against the use of several main authoritative text of the Jewish canon. In Israel, however, these views are not only a matter of private worship, since the religious services (Jewish or otherwise) are integrated into the state civil service apparatus. So, when seeing the ruling signed by people bearing the titles of civil servants one may assume that the ruling has something to do with the state on behalf of which these servants toil. In this case what is the worth of all the official denunciations as long as the said individuals continue their employment within the same apparatus.  Is the state of Israel really opposed to this ruling or it just pays the lip service to the principles of the democracy and tolerance, in order not to lose the prestigious "the only democracy in the Middle East" status? You judge yourself.


However, I find one surprising aspect in this affair after all. Although, evidently in its spirit the ruling is directed against Arabs, the wording refers to the general population of gentiles in Israel. This population include many ethnic and religious groups including many members of the Russian community, many of whom would not be recognized as Jewish by the religious establishment. These people, according to the same establishment, may number in hundreds of thousands, a substantial proportion of the population of Israel. They are also usually indistinguishable from the "kosher" Russian Jews and tend to be well integrated within the Jewish community. What is more, many of them would probably consider themselves Jewish. This ruling, if effective, would seriously undermine their status. In fact, they would have been hurt much more than Arabs, because they lack a set of service providers separate from that of the Jewish majority. They would be unable (or unwilling) to buy or rent  homes in the Arab cities and they would be discriminated against in the Jewish cities. In view of this, it's really surprising to see how little if any reaction this ruling has elicited from the right wing (another euphemism) Liebermann's "Israel Beitainu" party which have received such a large share of the Russian votes. Apparently, the defense of its own electorate has a lower priority there than bashing the Arab minority. 


Why is it that that the phrase "first they came for the communists..." is constantly flashing in my mind? I am not a communist - ask the rabbis!!!

Here is the letter I received from Gush Shalom organization. I think it's important enough to share with you:

Open Letter of Appeal to the Jewish people

Dear Friends,

 I write to ask for your help in gaining the freedom of a good man,

a man of peace, and a man of conscience.

In the Jewish scriptures there is great emphasis on justice and freedom

and it is for such, for one man, that I write to seek your help.

He will not be aware that I am writing this Appeal, but I do so in the hope

that, with your help,  it will produce his freedom, and not (and this I must risk) cause yet more punishment and cruelty to be  inflicted upon him.

However, I feel when I tell you the story, it will touch your hearts and there

will be those amongst you who will be able to help him gain his freedom.

In May,2010, this man was returned to prison to serve three months for allegedly breaking his prison release restrictions and speaking to Foreign Media.   On Sunday llth July,2010, he had  his first visit in seven weeks.   His brother, Meir, was granted a 30 minute visit.  There was  a glass window between them and they spoke via the phone.  He wore a prison uniform.  He is held in the hardest prison section there is in the prison.  It has the most notorious criminals in the country, well known hard murder cases.  All about a dozen are in severe isolation conditions.  He is in a cell by himself for 24 hours a day, no window but a small wire covered crack at the top part of one wall.  He has about an hour’s walk a day in a very tiny yard.  He was simply thrown in a cell by the security agents, the door locked, and left to suffer there all alone.  He has not spoken to anyone in all the seven weeks and this visit was (apart from a short visit of his lawyer 6 weeks ago) the first conversation he had in seven weeks.  His food is limited in quality and quantity, and his reading material two books he has with him.  Of course his spirits are down as a result of being put in such harsh, inhuman and cruel conditions.

His name is Mordechai Vanunu, and he is in an Israeli prison cell.  Mordechai is no

stranger to prison.  In l986 Mordechai Vanunu told the world that Israel had a Nuclear Weapons Programme and he was given 18 years imprisonment for doing so.  He is the Israeli Nuclear whistle blower and 24 years later continues to be punished for trying to warn the Israelis and protect both Israel and the world from a Nuclear weapons disaster.   Mordechai Vanunu served the full 18 years of his sentence (eleven years in solitary ) and upon release, instead of allowing him to leave Israel, the Israeli Government put  severe restrictions upon him, including forbidding him to leave Israel and not to speak to foreign media.  It was the allegedly breaking of these restrictions and speaking to Foreign media, which resulted in Mordechai being returned to prison for 3 months.   He has  6 weeks left to serve in these harsh prison conditions, and even upon release from prison will still have to remain in Israel until next April, 2011 when the restrictions will be reviewed and probably renewed yet again, as they have been renewed each year for the past 6 years.   Some people say Vanunu will never be allowed to leave Israel but will die there, if indeed in the meantime his spirit is not broken by his ill treatment and he losses his sanity.

The Shabak continues to tell the Israeli Government he is a security risk and must not be released and the Israeli Judiciary and Government obey them and keep him imprisoned.   Vanunu is no risk to Israeli National Security.  He has no nuclear

Secrets.  I have asked some Israelis why they think Israel refuses to allow Mordechai Vanunu to leave Israel.   Various reasons are given but the most frequent answer is they feel the Israeli Government does not trust its citizens and holding Mordechai Vanunu, forever, if necessary sends out the signal to Israeli Citizens to behave themselves.

It seems, if this is so, that the strategy is working.  To date only a few courageous Jewish people have raised their voices against such cruelty and injustice perpetrated upon Mordecai, and called for him to be allowed to leave Israel.  But I don’t believe Mordechai will never be allowed to leave Israeli and will die in Jerusalem.   I have met Mordechai many times since he was released from prison on 2lst April, 2004.   He is a good man, a man of peace, and a true Gandhian  spirit. Instead of punishing him, Israel should be proud of Mordechai Vanunu,  and I believe that future generations of Israelis will look back and realize that there lived amongst them a great visionary and man of peace, not only for Israel, but for the human family.  It was with great joy I nominated him several times for the Nobel Peace Prize, as did many other prominent names during the past 24 years.  He richly serves the NPP as he lives and acts in the true spirit of Alfred Nobel, who left his prize for those who would work for peace and disarmament.

However, it is with the deepest sadness that I acknowledge that in spite of world campaigns by many, including Amnesty International (and personal letters from myself  to President Obama, President Shimon Peres,) Mordechai Vanunu continues 24 years later to be most cruelly imprisoned and punished by Israel.   Most  Political and Spiritual leaders, and International Bodies,  of our time are silent in the face of Israel’s abuse of Vanunu’s basic human right to freedom of speech and liberty, which is in violation of many International Laws.

However, I have hope that he will be free and I place my hope in those Jewish people who read this story and are moved to right a wrong continuing to be done to Mordechai Vanunu,  and they will demand that their Government give him his freedom, and allow him to leave Israel.

Shalom,

Mairead Maguire

Nobel Peace Laureate

www.peacepeople.com

14.7.2010

In order to understand the dynamics of the current crisis between Israel and Turkey, let’s first examine Turkey’s perspective on this crisis. In the short term, the best possible solution from the Turkish point of view would be for Israel to cave in by accepting the responsibility for the crisis and meeting Turkish demands on the flotilla issue and, in the long run, to have Israel reaching the compromised solution with its Arab neighbours. Such an outcome would boost enormously the prestige of Turkey not only as one of quite a few defenders of the Arab and more generally Islamic downtrodden and humiliated population, but as the only effective safeguard of their rights. More over, in case of such an outcome, Turkey would be completely vindicated in the eyes of the Western public, who begins to see with the increasing suspicion Turkish independent policy vis-a-vis its allies. As the result of such development, Turkey would be able to maintain friendly, but not special relations with Israel, thus putting itself above the local politics both in the eyes of the Arab and the Western public. From the Israeli perspective, however, the best solution for the current crisis in the relations would be the return to the “antebellum” status with Turkey relinquishing its demands.  This would allow the renewal of the military and economic cooperation between the countries, which are so vital for the Israeli standoff against Iran.

On the surface, the Turkish ambitions are optimal for all the parties involved in the conflict and that indeed makes Turks more persistent and offence-prone in their dealing with Israel. However, such an approach has one major flaw of being impractical. Whatever the stereotypical view of the conflict tends to suggest, there is no solution just around the corner. The truth is that the minimal and the legitimate Jewish aspiration of having a sovereign state, i.e. what is known as a recognition of the Jewish nature of Israel, is inconsistent with the minimal and legitimate Palestinian demand of the right of return. The basic problem of the conflict that it would be impossible to find on the Jewish side a leader who would consider relinquishing the former and on the Palestinians side - the later.

Since both the Jews and the Palestinians are perfectly aware of the fact, that no matter what progress is achieved at the peace talks, no real solution will be found in a foreseeable future, I think it is safe to assume that the Turks are aware of this fact too. Thus from their perspective they are forced to lead a suboptimal game with the view of maximizing their gains, while keeping the costs low. The Turks realized that being perceived a close partner in Israel incurs a very serious loss in the eyes of the new promising clients among the Arab and Islamic nations. In order to maximize Turkish gains there the best policy would be to change the perception of being an ally of Israel, while keeping some level of cooperation in order to ensure the flow of the Israeli technology and the support of the the pro-Israeli elements in the US and Europe.

This approach is at the heart of the conflict and leads to fare amount of bad blood between the two nations. The problem from the Turkish perspective is that they are interested in change of perception more than in breaking the actual ties with the Jewish state. According to this scheme Israel was expected to put up with the Turkish angry invectives in order to preserve the ties which are deemed (correctly) by Turkey as being vital to the Israeli standing in the region. That is why Turks were sincerely surprised by the Israeli forceful reaction, which manifested itself in the incident of the ambassador humiliation and in the blank refusal to concede any ground in the flotilla incident.

From the Israel’s perspective, however, the picture is different. The Israelis could have put up with some Turkish preaching, but not with the spring in the relations between Turkey and Iran-Syria block. Israelis need their Turkish ally mostly in order to contain the creeping Iranian influence at its borders. If not for Iran and Syria, Israel’s interests have much more in common with Kurds rather than Turks. And that on top of the concern of having Israeli military know-how and Israeli intelligence compromised by the emerging Turko-Iranian cooperation. In short, Israel on the one hand, is not interested in sharing their Turkish ally with their arch-enemy and on the other hand, perceives the deterioration of the relations as the Turkish strategic plan to realign itself both regionally and globally in order to get a new recognition as truly independent power broker.  

The gap between what Turkey had estimated Israel would be willing to accept in order to preserve the ties with Turkey and what Israel was ready to put up in the real life, put everyone in a very inconvenient situation, far beyond any reasonable interest of the both countries. Turkey has clearly overplayed its hand in their reaction to the latest crisis in that that it made it virtually impossible for the Israeli government to deal with it in a way that would allow any kind of healing between the countries. Turkey’s demands of apology, compensation, restitution, international investigation and a complete removal of the siege over Gaza, amounts not only to public humiliation of Israel over the incident, for which more than one side should bear the responsibility, but also a very serious intervention in the matters related to the security of the state as it is perceived in Israel.

In view of this situation, the prognosis for the Turko-Israeli ties is not very bright. Turkey has achieved an important gain of positioning itself as a fearless defender of the Palestinian rights. It scored an important point by associating itself with the success of the flotilla to affect some change in the Israeli siege over Gaza. On the cost side it disrupted the relations with Israel far beyond what it had intended in the first place. If the purely economic damage will be amply offset by the development of the relations with its Eastern neighbours, the technological aspect would still be a serious loss for Turkish army and industry. However, the most serious damage will come from the perceived shift of axis by Turkey, which occurred far two quickly in order to be effectively contained. Although the alliance with Israel was a burden in dealing with the Muslim partners, a complete dissolution of it accompanied by a very vociferous and vitriolic anti-Israeli campaign, bearing uncanny resemblance of the Iranian rhetoric, may not go well with some of the Western public.

From the Israeli perspective the loss of Turkish ally is extremely damaging. Its standing in the Middle East has suffered a heavy blow and the international reaction showed that Turkey’s stance has found resonance among many people in the West. However, since Israel finds itself in a situation, where it has very little space for political maneuver, it seems that Israeli government just came to accept the dissolution of this alliance and would make little effort to appease Turkey. It would and should not exacerbate the situation any further, but  it’s bound to be drown into publicity wars, with almost unavoidable effect of alienating not only the current Turkish government, but also the Turkish public even more. All in all, Israel undoubtedly suffered more from these events than Turkey, but some of the damage came as a result of calculated shift in Turkish regional strategy.

Not surprisingly, world's patience seems to have ended. The last thing that I have seen was Rushdi criticizing Israel for the excessive use of force. Now we are left with Dershowitz. Although I am not sure anymore even about that. I am not going to say that the Israelis are going to be hung on the main square or Israel will be besieged by the united force of NATO, Iran and Arab league. I am quite sure that even trivial sanctions are not on the horizon. However, if the international press is something to go by, Israel is firmly in the wrong camp. The only consolation is that we constitute a camp of our own -  the camp of autistic nuclear arms carriers. North Korea and Iran may be considered candidates, but they are not as strong on the autism scale.

From the Israeli perspective, the saddest thing is that really the last straw was not an insidious crime committed by the Israeli warmongers, but a well designed provocation devised implicitly or explicitly by Israel's now, alas, former ally Turkey and a strange coalition of people that for the most part cannot be considered as classical anti-Semites. Turkey, a perpetual victim of disdain and conceit, perpetrated unbelievable with such striking political and diplomatic prowess, that really the only thing Israelis can wish for is to have someone like Erdogan and his guys in charge.  They have seized their day by identifying correctly the new balance of power in the world and made a fantastic change of course from being a subservient and ill-regarded lackey of the Western powers to becoming a rising star of the new brave multipolar world.  Of course, to power that shift they have to sacrificed something and they really found an ingenious solution: to sacrifice they did not care much about in the first place - Israel.

The gambit went along the following lines: Turkey was not overly popular among the countries, which would constitute the primary basis for its ascendancy, namely, Arabs. This goes back to the troubled times of the Ottoman Empire, where the Arabs felt resentful toward their younger Muslim brother - the Turks. In fact, Britain and other colonial powers got their foothold in the Middle East by promising to liberate the Arabs from their oppressors. The did not fail at that and with the help of legendary hero Lawrence they resurrected Arab sovereignty and along the way planted the seeds of conflicts for century to come. Humiliated Turks, having massacred most of their neighbors at one time or another felt quite lonely in this region until Israel came.  Of course, there was not much in common between two countries, except for the enmity of their neighbors and mutual indulgence in having their military running their affairs. One did it through democratic process another did not bother for the most part. However, they forged an alliance, Israeli part of which was to supply Turkey with the modern weapons and, most importantly, share its clout among its Atlantic buddies.

However, since these idyllic times quite a few things have changed. First, the end of history predicted by the employees of the USA State department failed to materialize and with it the invincibility aura of the Western alliance was shattered in several unnecessary wars, which were initiated primarily to demonstrate this invincibility. Second, the economic power of the West suffered noticeable decline, matched by the changes in the demography of the Western countries. The Europe of today has become both much less attractive due to the financial liability and badly designed structure of fiscal integration and much less interested in any kind of expansion (If anything, it begins finally to understand what the Eurosceptics meant when they advised against bundling together countries with diversed economies and different economic problems by single currency) . Finally, several Eastern neighbors showed a great promise in being serious allies as well as headaches in case something goes wrong. The only problem was that Turkey had to pay membership fee for being admitted to this new non-Western club. The one thing that could both satisfy this demand and score very lavish PR points among the new friends was damping Israel.

There was only one problem though, Turkey did not want to lose all the advantage of being on good terms with the West, so it could not turn it back abruptly on Israel. It had prepare the rapture. This rapture was propagated through series of well managed confrontations with Israel that set a destructive dynamic in the mutual relationships. However, for the final accord there was a need for something spectacular that would provide a complete alibi for Turkey in the eyes of the Western friends.

The flotilla massacre, as it is probably going to be remembered, was the most perfect alibi. The beauty of the act was that Turkey could know with very high level of security what the Israelis would do. They set the convoy, they populated one ship with the Turkish citizens of a very particular affiliation, which left few doubts regarding what their reaction would be to the Israeli assault on their vessels. And they explained to everyone that this was by no means a state-sponsored project, just in case the Israelis would hesitate. Israelis took the bite and boarded the ship with customary force of several dozens commando soldiers armed with the paintball riffles. Everything else is history. Chapeau to the Turks!

However, as an Israeli, I am much  more concerned with my own side of the story. The Turkish brilliance was by no means matched by Israel's wisdom. Quite to the contrary it was matched only by Israeli arrogance. As an Israeli and a human being I am incensed by the failure of my country to put in place a serious investigation of the alleged crimes committed by the Israeli forces in Gaza. I am also very disappointed by the failure of  the international community to force Israel into such action. I am devastated by the failure of Israel to stop the expansion of settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, the settlements that promise me and my family a bleak future in the best case scenario. I feel miserable that nobody among the Israeli friends found courage to press Israel on that issue. There is one common ground for all these actions by Israel and it is the political expedience, well... short-sighted, petty but still understandable. In this case, however, what really irritates me is the stupidity of the action. I understand that the government wanted to assert its right to act against every perceived threat in a way, place and at a time it chooses, exactly like when Mossad "took out" a leader of Hamas in Dubai several months ago, ruining on the way the foundation of the alliance with our not so numerous friends. And now again the irresponsible decision causes more harm to Israel than thousand boats coming to Gaza.

The attack on flotilla was a crime, a crime against those who lost their lives even if they had assaulted the soldiers first, a crime against the soldiers themselves who were sent to put their lives on the line only to cause more embarrassment to their country, and finally a crime against people of Israel who deserve better. Our incompetent government toils days and nights so that our lives and lives of our kin abroad will be worse. Through the predetermined acts and acts of pure negligence it misses no opportunity to depict us as self-absorbed egotistic psychopaths indifferent to other people's suffering. Through its poor judgment it plays along other people schemes to totally destroy the legitimacy of our state. It's not pleasant to be ruled by the people of dubious moral character, but why do they have to be incompetent slobs on top of that?

The independence day is here. This is the day that usually throws me into somewhat confused state of mind. My country is 62 and I am proud, because I and many other people I know consider Israel the ultimate miracle, populated by wonderful and loving people. I could have mentioned many reasons for my pride, but that would be unnecessary since my country is so proficient in touting its own achievements. However, I find it hard to forget millions of other people who consider Israel to be the ultimate evil, conceived by the ailing minds of the European colonialists, worshiping violence and hellbent on killing people and stealing their future. The reasons for this are obvious too. They have remained in the minds of millions of people as flares on the TV screens, showing footage from Gaza and the West Bank. How can one reconcile these so obvious proofs of the two contradictory propositions? And even more importantly, what shall I do with them personally?

Of course, human beings cannot live with their minds split. They have to  make choices. I have made mine. I don't know whether this choice is right. I cannot advise anyone on what he or she ought to do. However, I can wish the people of Israel that one day we can live without the need to justify ourselves to friends and foes and most importantly to ourselves, that one day we can say what we really think and not what we have to in accordance to our narrow path of cognitive dissonance avoidance strategy, which causes us to like inept and criminal presidents and to seek friendship with dark regimes. I am not sure how exactly it may be achieved, but one thing comes to mind: we all have to consider the implications of our choices. I hope that this new year of my state will be the year of the responsible choices both by the citizens of Israel and its government. And also I hope the outcome of these choices will let us next year be proud of our state, without feeling guilty about this pride.

Happy independence day!

Reading Israeli media in the last two days one can definitely find himself in a very perplexed state of mind. There is a lot of buzz around some judge, named Goldstone; he obviously did something wrong, and he is probably one of the most dangerous enemies of the Jewish people, but exactly why one could not understand. Dear foreign ministry, please explain to me, a confused Israeli citizen, what was really wrong in this report. Does it contain any factual inaccuracies? Did it use inappropriate means for gathering the information? How the inherent anti-Israeli bias manifests itself in concrete terms?

Trying to figure out by myself I may come up with certain answers. For starters, I think it is not fair that Israel is being singled out, while of course other countries commit much graver crimes. This is true, but as we can imagine our establishment is really not in a position to say anything of this sort. After all, the countries who have their opponents' civilians killed by tens if not hundreds of thousands are also our closest friends: US, UK or just influential countries with whom you would not like to create too much tensions like Russia. Poor, poor Israeli leaders. They have been left without their mightiest argument.

What else could it be? Is it possible perhaps that Israeli leaders (and possibly, the public itself) don't consider taking the life of the Palestinian civilians a crime anymore. After all, they all would be gladly taking ours, wouldn't they? Or may be we have ceased to be a state and have turned into a gang, a gang that lives according to its own rules, devised primarily to defend its own members no matter at what cost? Or may be they all are lairs. All of them: Judge Goldstone, Palestinians, B'tselem, Human Right Watch. They all came here conniving their little plots against us, determined to bring about our downfall or probably a new Holocaust. Yes, Holocaust is the word. That's it. A complete annihilation of the Jewish people. That's why we don't like Mr. Goldstone with his kangaroo court.

I wish I could be less bitter, but I can't. We have reached a very crucial point. Beyond this point lies either hope of retrieving our own conscience or losing it forever and becoming irreversibly another failed state coloured in the cold tones of genocide and oppression. Far from being anti-Semitic this report offers us a final hope of cleansing ourselves of this poisonous and stifling air of parochial chauvinism. If we take this offer it would signify to the world and to ourselves our intention to stay on the right side of the divide, if we reject it it would retroactively prove that those who bombed shelters and schools, shot and humiliated people, vandalized and stole property did our bidding. Now we have to chose and may be it will make the choice a little easier if we remember that our friends and other important states will be affected by our choice too.