Israel

Plus ça change in Cairo

Don’t expect Cairo to become Kabul now that the Muslim Brotherhood’s presidential candidate, Mohammed Mursi, has been sworn into power earlier today. There are real fears, of course, about the future of Egypt under an Islamist president and it’s foolish to whitewash Mursi as either moderate or benign. The Muslim Brotherhood is a deeply reactionary and dangerous group, but Mursi will find it extremely difficult to implement the more radical aspects of his agenda.   Officially, the Brotherhood has said it will respect all existing treaties – a subtle attempt to placate fears about Egypt’s future relations with Israel. Yet, when Mursi’s candidature was announced one of the clerics invited

Have Israel and Britain given up on each other?

Benjamin Netanyahu’s announcement to authorise more than 800 new housing units in West Bank settlements, and the condemnation which followed from British Foreign Secretary William Hague, has marked a new high-water mark in the mutual frustration felt by the two governments. The move, which followed close on the heels of the Israeli Prime Minister’s decision to block legislation to regularise unauthorised settlement building, was criticised in a strongly-worded statement from Mr Hague last Thursday: ‘While we appreciate the Israeli Government’s efforts to avoid damaging legislation in the Israeli Knesset by voting against a bill to legalise West Bank outposts, the decision to move settlers from an illegal outpost by creating

Gunter Grass: the tin drum and the tin ear

This morning’s editorial in Israel’s left-wing Haaretz newspaper noted a double standard that was also a bad joke. Israel’s Interior Minister’s had declared, ‘If Gunter Grass wants to continue to distribute his false and distorted works, I suggest he do so from Iran, where he’ll find an appreciative audience.’ The minister could not detect the irony in his words, the paper said. It is precisely his decision not to let Grass enter Israel because of a poem he wrote that ‘is characteristic of dark regimes like those in Iran or North Korea’. You can read Grass’s poem here. I find it a false and vainglorious work because of its strong

How do you solve a problem like Baroness Ashton?

Baroness Ashton has managed a return to diplomatic form by comparing the murder yesterday of three children and a Rabbi at a Jewish school in Toulouse with ‘what is happening in Gaza.’ Plenty of people have already deplored her comments. But they present an opportunity to address one of the underlying and too infrequently asked questions of our time: if you do not think Ashton is a very good politician, what can you do about it? Ordinarily if a politician says or does something you do not like we, the electorate, are at some point given the opportunity to vote them out. There used to be considerable pride in this

Will Israel strike?

While we’re on the subject of conflict in the Middle East, it’s worth pointing out the cover story to this week’s edition of the magazine. It’s by the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, and it deals with the dangerous war of words currently being waged over Iran. Will it tip over into real war? In the eye-catching conclusion to his article, Goldberg suggests so: ‘I thought, before the Netanyahu-Obama summit, that the meeting would delay premature action by Israel against Iran. I believe now that I was mistaken. My sense is that Netanyahu feels the press of history and may well strike at Iran in the coming months. The clues are increasingly

Iran Hawks Circling

At National Review, Mario Loyola offers a pretty succinct summary of the conservative (that is, American conservative) case for attacking Iran: [I]n an editorial, the Wall Street Journal makes the same points that I made on the Corner over the weekend, here and here. The only way to convince Iran to abandon its pursuit of nuclear weapons is to convince it that the risks of pressing on are prohibitive. Almost certainly the only way to do that is to convince them that military strikes are coming if they don’t pull back. If the goal is to deter from getting the bomb in the first place, then we should be giving Iran the

10% of Voters Will Agree With Anything (Except for the Canadian Question)

Almost no belief is so barmy it can’t win the approval of at least one in ten voters. The problem for politicians is that the nutty tenth is not fixed. Indeed, perhaps a majority of the population is, on occasion, likely to be a member of the loopy group. The latest evidence that a tenth of the population is utterly unsound on even the simplest questions comes from a Gallup survey of American attitudes to other countries: Perhaps some of those pleased with North Korea thought they were being asked their views on South Korea. Whatever. That one in ten Americans professes to have a positive view of Iran is,

Hague’s ‘Cold War’ warning

William Hague has gazed into his Middle Eastern crystal ball and doesn’t like what he sees. In an interview in today’s Telegraph, he says of Iran: ‘It is a crisis coming down the tracks, because they are clearly continuing their nuclear weapons programme… If they obtain nuclear weapons capability, then I think other nations across the Middle East will want to develop nuclear weapons. And so, the most serious round of nuclear proliferation since nuclear weapons were invented would have begun with all the destabilising effects in the Middle East. And the threat of a new cold war in the Middle East without necessarily all the safety mechanisms… That would

Our enemy’s enemy

It’s unusual for The Guardian and The Spectator to agree on anything, but Seamus Milne and our own John R Bradley are sceptical about these Syrian rebels whom we’re being invited to support. Bradley was alone in predicting the Egyptian revolution, and argues in today’s magazine that the conventional wisdom is once again wrong. Who’s backing the rebels? The Qataris, keen to depose the last secular regime in the Arab world. And the Saudis and Israelis, whose hatred of Iran eclipses all other considerations: this isn’t about the Syrian people, but about depriving the ayatollahs of an ally. Some in the West also take the view that the enemy’s enemy

Does Iran Actually Want the Bomb?

The obvious answer to this is, Yes of course it does. Were I advising the Iranian regime I’d probably be pretty keen on developing a nuclear capability too. At the very least I should certainly want Iran’s opponents to think Iran has serious nuclear ambitions. And yet, I’d also appreciate that if Iran’s opponents really believe Iran is close to acquiring a nuclear weapon then the game enters a new and complicated phase that is dangerous for Iran too. So I might actually want Iran’s opponents to be unsure or confused and prefer it if the question of Iran’s nuclear desires remained ambiguous. That way, I might argue, Iran could

An Israeli strike on Iran?

Will they or won’t they? Most political parlour games involve a question of this kind and the one about whether Israel will strike Iran – played out regularly in Washington, London and Paris – is no exception. The last couple of days have seen more sabre-rattling than before. Israeli Vice Premier Moshe Yaalon, who heads the Strategic Affairs Ministry, and is a former commander of the Israeli military, said all of Iran’s nuclear installations are vulnerable to military strikes while the US defence secretary was quoted as saying he thought Israel was likely to bomb Iran within months. They may or may not, but it is unlikely they will communicate

Will Israel bomb a near-nuclear Iran in 2012?

An Israeli strike on Iran has to be the most over-predicted event of recent years. It was meant to happen last year. And the year before that. But now there are reasons why 2012 could, indeed, be the year when Israel will find it propitious to take overt military action against Iran’s nuclear programme. (Everyone assumes that a range of covert activities, from assassinations to cyber attacks, are already ongoing). The Iranian government is moving closer to having the requisite capabilities, and can reasonably be expected to take the final steps towards nuclearisation. What better way for Tehran to distract attention from their burgeoning problems — including sanctions, economic hardship,

Palestine presses on in the UN

While the Palestinian bid for membership at the United Nations moved closer to rejection, it turned out that Palestine has a veto over which UN agencies the United States funds. For after Palestine gained admission to UNESCO, the US administration followed through on its threats and cut the organisation’s funding. As UNESCO is based on assessed contributions from member-states, others cannot make up the short-fall. The Palestinian Authority is now considering making applications to the WHO, WIPO and the International Telecommunications Union – technocratic bodies that actually play a large in role. For example, the WHO is crucial for dealing with global pandemics like SARS and Swine Flue. So while

Hamas splashes out

There are many questions arising from the prisoner swap between Israel and Hamas, not least whether it opens the door to a more lasting deal in future. But one question that deserves more attention than it will get, and ought to concern European policymakers, is where international aid is going. Take this little snippet from Reuters: “Palestinians freed by Israel in a trade for soldier Gilad Shalit took their morning exercise on Wednesday around a luxury swimming pool overlooking the Mediterranean, instead of circling the prison yard as they have done for long years inside. There was none of the usual breakfast-room free-for-all at Gaza’s 4-star Al-Mashtal beach front hotel. The

Saving Private Shalit

It’s difficult for the outside world to understand the huge significance that Gilad Shalit’s release, this morning, has for Israel. A soldier captured by Hamas five years ago, he has become a huge cause célèbre — to the extent that black cabs in London were even commissioned with his picture on it. Books that he wrote aged 11 were printed and bought in their thousands by Israelis. He was wanted back so badly that Israel has agreed to release 1,027 Palestinian prisoners, among them hardcore terrorists. Events stemming from the Arab Spring have made both sides eager to do a deal, which experts say might contribute — even if in

An Execution in Tehran

Cranmer is right about this: It really is quite incredible. Last week, a convicted murderer, Troy Davis, was finally executed in the United States, and it seemed as though the entire British (and EU) Establishment arose to denounce the barbarism. Even Pope Benedict XVI appealed for clemency. Yet today, Iran is scheduled to hang a Christian pastor for ‘apostasy’, and the collective silence from our scurvy politicians, trappist churchmen and hypocritical media is positively deafening. Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani was found guilty two years ago of ‘apostasy’, even though he was never a practising Muslim. His guilt was determined because he ‘has Muslim ancestry’ (which is a kind of convenient catch-all

The new Israel and Palestine question

The halls of the UN are packed with presidents and foreign ministers. But for all the thousands of subjects under discussion, this year’s General Assembly will be remembered for one issue only: the Palestinian statehood application. Mahmoud Abbas has made clear he wants to proceed, despite the reality of a US veto. In the end, it may not come down a showdown. If an application is made to the UN Security Council, the issue will likely go to a sub-committee of the full UNSC and take quite some time before it comes to a vote, whatever the Palestinians may want. That is why the US prefers the option to a

Abbas pitches for a Palestinian state

As Daniel wrote this morning, the Middle East peace process has returned to the headlines. Palestinian President Abbas has called for Palestine to be granted full membership of the United Nations, adding that the Palestinians had “legitimate right” to full membership. Abbas added that he remained committed to working with Israel, but said that negotiations had reached “an impasse, a dead end due to the stubborn policies of the Israeli Government that reject commitment to reference of negotiations based on international legitimacy.” This announcement would appear to have made Britain’s diplomatic position no less uncertain. Just as before, Britain’s position will depend on the precise wording of the resolution. Even

The Israel Palestine question

After a hiatus, the Middle East Peace Process is about to return to the international stage. The Palestinians are pushing at the UN for recognition. Nobody knows yet what they will actually ask for: full statehood or just upgrading their UN status to “non-member”. But, whatever the language of the resolution, the issue will be contentious. By some estimates, 126 states are poised to back the Palestinian request, including France, India, Brazil, Spain. The US will not support a Palestinian move, nor is Germany likely to. Britain remains undecided, hoping to help the Palestinians draft a resolution that other Europeans can sign up to. It’s not clear what Britain and

Britain’s Palestinian statehood question

The Palestinians are seeking United Nations recognition as a state and a vote is apparently imminent. The Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland has a useful account of the diplomatic arithmetic and explains how the possible vote could be decided by European countries and by Britain in particular. ‘Barack Obama has already said the US will vote against any Palestinian move towards statehood at the UN general assembly now gathering in New York. Large swaths of Latin America, Africa, Asia and the Middle East plan to vote for it. Which leaves Europe as the diplomatic battleground. If the leading European powers side with the US, the Palestinian initiative will be seen as a