Das „Schlaglicht Israel“ bietet einen Einblick in die innenpolitischen Debatten Israels. Es erscheint alle zwei Wochen und fasst Kommentare aus israelischen Tageszeitungen zusammen. So spiegelt es ausgewählte, aktuelle politische Ereignisse wider, die die israelische Öffentlichkeit bewegen.
Die Themen dieser Ausgabe:
- Umstrittener Flaggenmarsch in Jerusalems Altstadt
- Schuldfrage für den Tod von Shireen Abu Akleh weiter ungeklärt
- Attentat auf führendes Mitglied der iranischen Revolutionsgarden
Rund 70.000 überwiegend nationalreligiöse israelische Staatsbürger_innen zogen am Jerusalem Tag durch die Altstadt. Mit dem traditionellen Flaggenmarsch erinnern die Teilnehmer_innen an die Eroberung Ostjerusalems und damit auch der Altstadt während des Sechstagekrieges 1967. Die Zeremonie, die regelmäßig von Randalen und antiarabischen Sprechchören begleitet wird, wird von Palästinenser_innen als schwere Provokation empfunden. Im Vorfeld des diesjährigen Jerusalem Tages warnte die Hamas, wie bereits 2021, vor einer Eskalation. Im vergangenen Jahr war zwar die Route des Flaggenmarsches von den israelischen Behörden im letzten Moment geändert worden, so dass sie nicht durch das Damaskus-Tor und das muslimische Viertel der Altstadt führte. Nichtsdestotrotz schoss damals die Hamas Raketen aus dem Gazastreifen auf Israel ab, was zu einem elftätigen Krieg führte. Einige Minister_innen rieten auch diesmal zu einer Verlegung der traditionellen Route. Omer Bar-Lev, Minister für Innere Sicherheit, lehnte den Vorschlag jedoch ab. „Jerusalem ist die ewige Hauptstadt Israels. In einer Demokratie ist es erlaubt und wichtig zu demonstrieren, solange es nach dem Gesetz und in unserem Fall nach den von der Polizei festgelegten Regeln ist, und so werden wir handeln.“, begründete der sozialdemokratische Politiker. Von einigen punktuellen Auseinandersetzungen in Jerusalem abgesehen, verlief der Jerusalem Tag weitgehend ruhig.
Israel and Hamas play a game of chicken over Jerusalem flag march
The route of the march has gone through several changes, yet it has always included the Muslim Quarter and the Damascus Gate. The only time the marchers were prohibited from passing through the gate was last year, when then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered to change the route at the last minute over security concerns. Despite it being the only flag march that didn’t pass through the Damascus Gate, Hamas launched rockets towards the capital, kickstarting an 11-day war, known as Operation Guardian of the Walls, claiming their threats had succeeded in folding Israel. (…) This year’s Jerusalem Day flag march once again unites Palestinians across the board toward a collective cause. (…) Israel won’t allow itself to bend to demands of terror groups and allow Hamas to determine its conduct in the capital. Hence, a classic game of chicken is under way. (…) Hamas and Fatah are calling on residents of east Jerusalem and all Arab Israelis to make their way to the Al-Aqsa Mosque (…) in order to „protect“ it from the marchers. (…) A small glimmer of optimism, however, can be detected in the indirect talks between Israel and Hamas. (…) Every change in the march’s route will represent a victory for Hamas in the public eye, especially in matters regarding the Temple Mount, thus Israel cannot agree to such. Folding could prevent immediate escalation, but is bound to have severe long-term consequences, which Hamas would use to alter the Israeli policies according to their needs. (…)
Elior Levy, YED, 26.05.22
Jerusalem Day flag march should be done sensitively
Thousands of Israelis are expected to join the traditional flag march into the Old City (…) a nationalist event aimed at celebrating the reunification of the capital in the Six Day War 55 years ago. They have every right to go ahead with the festive parade, waving Israeli flags and asserting Israel’s sovereignty over Jerusalem. However (…) the marchers and police need to show sensitivity and seichel (common sense). The route of the march, from downtown Jerusalem through the Old City to the Western Wall, poses a challenge to law enforcement. Many Palestinians consider it a provocation (…) government and law enforcement agencies are not backing down. That is the right decision; Israel cannot and should not set policy based on Hamas threats. (…) However, march organizers announced (…) that attendance will be limited at certain points – including at Damascus Gate and the Western Wall – due to overcrowding concerns. (…) Authorities have restricted entry to mass gatherings, including at the Western Wall, after last year’s stampede at Mount Meron on Lag Ba’omer killed 45 people. (…) Israel should not change the route and should not give in to Hamas’s demands. Doing so would be a sign of weakness that would be exploited by the terrorist organization. Nevertheless, decent behavior is needed. In the past, marchers have walked through the Muslim Quarter banging on Palestinian storefronts, holding signs that inflame tensions and shouting curses and racist slogans. The police need to ensure that this does not happen. People are free to sing and dance, but they must avoid acts of racism. (…)
Editorial, JPO, 26.05.22
As Israelis, we should march proudly in our capital
(…) Just like every other capital around the world, Jerusalem hosts mass marches. (…) the Flag Dance march is one of the oldest and most beautiful. Tens of thousands of religious Zionist youths, usually dressed in white, walk the streets of the eternal city, the same city generations of Jews have prayed toward. There is nothing wrong with that. The only ones angered by the march are the last remnants of the Arab nation who continue to dream of wiping out the Jewish state. (…) Does it sound reasonable to you for a country to ask its neighbors for permission to hold a march in its capital? Do Jordan, Egypt, or Qatar, update Israel on mass events in their territories? (…) When it comes to the flag march, things have gotten downright bizarre. (…) No foreign entity, terrorist or legitimate, has a right to intervene in what goes on in Israel’s capital. Threats of violence cannot determine where we go in our country. (…) This tough approach is the only way to begin to put the genie back in the bottle. (…)
Ariel Kahana, IHY, 26.05.22
Israel’s Flag Madness Heralds a War Around the Corner
(…) we have the Flag March to (not) look forward to, religious Zionism’s celebration of its racism. The parade passes through Jerusalem’s Old City and, in years past, has included banging on shuttered Arab storefronts accompanied by shouts and whistles. (…) The flag madness is taking hold in the government, the Knesset and civil society. Anyone who arrogantly declared the end of the age of nationalism and its endless number of victims in the not-so-distant past is invited to visit the present – and receive a stinging slap in the face. (…) There’s something healthy, right and touching in the desire to be, even briefly, part of something larger than ourselves. (…) But the sick obsession with flags that has been growing lately is a symptom of a serious childhood illness – and the bloodshed here won’t stop until it’s cured. When a flag doesn’t symbolize partnership and kinship but rather defiance and antagonism, it’s a toxic sign of a bloody war lurking around the corner. (…) The Jews who make their love conditional on their flag, as well as the people who are so enchanted by the Palestinian flag and encourage the Palestinians to wave it, are trapped in a realm that verges on fascism. Wherever they see flags, they can’t see human beings.
Ravit Hecht, HAA, 27.05.22
Showing Off Israel’s Macho Force in Jerusalem March
(…) this year we’ll show so much power that Palestinians on either side of the Green Line will be afraid to be born, let alone to continue to live here. (…) Three thousand police officers will secure the Flag March – about the size of the entire force in the Jerusalem District. (…) three companies of reserve Border Police officers will be called up and the remainder put on alert for deployment. (…) What would Israel look like were the police actually to maintain order and prevent a regional flare-up at any cost? It would be better not to know. That might be good for the Diaspora Jew, the weakling, but that’s not why we founded the State of Israel. Forget about it. No way. (…) When Israelis speak about “sovereignty” and “governability” at a level befitting instructions for night maneuvers during a youth movement swearing-in ceremony; when the defense establishment sounds like a psychologist for “Married at First Sight” trying to match a very eligible woman to an alpha male (…) when no one in Israel shows any interest in the CNN investigation into the death of Shireen Abu Akleh, that suggests that the Palestinian-American Al Jazeera journalist was shot intentionally by Israeli soldiers; when her funeral devolves into barbarism (…). When all this happens, there is nothing left to do but to become stronger in your faith in God and to pray – on the Temple Mount, if possible. Nothing showy, just a silent “Shema Yisrael,” don’t make a big deal about it. Between you and me, maintaining the status quo is for weaklings.
Carolina Landsmann, HAA, 28.05.22
Israel has a racism problem – and it comes out on Jerusalem Day
(…) There were some scuffles and there were also some arrests, but by and large, the march seemed to have passed quietly by nightfall. Unlike last year, Hamas did not fire rockets at Jerusalem. So, who wasn’t there? Non-religious Israelis. The march was almost exclusively attended by people from the National-Religious camp – youths from Bnei Akiva, yeshiva students and girls from ulpanot from across the country. Sunday afternoon would have been the perfect time for Defense Minister Benny Gantz to order the IDF to evacuate some of the illegal outposts in the West Bank, since based on the makeup of the crowd at Damascus Gate, it seemed like all of the West Bank Hilltop Youth were in Jerusalem. (…) Jerusalem Day should be a day that is worth taking a moment to think about. After all, the Six-Day War was Israel’s greatest military victory and possibly one of the most amazing military feats in modern history. Israel at the time was a mere 19 years old but succeeded in defeating three large Arab armies, reunifying its capital and tripling in size. How did we get here? For years, Jerusalem Day was part of the national consensus. (…) What happened to Israel that Jerusalem Day – a day that was created to celebrate an amazing historic achievement – has turned into something that looks more like the “Israeli Far-Right Day?” (…) There is no hiding the fact that a significant percentage of Israel has taken a turn to the far-right. (…) Yes, Naftali Bennett formed a historic partnership with Ra’am leader Mansour Abbas, but let’s not forget that just days before the 2021 election, he called Abbas a supporter of terrorism. (…) Do we honestly believe that those sentiments just fade away? That they don’t trickle down into the public discourse? For the needle to move, systemic change is needed. It starts in the education system and continues through the political system and into our daily discourse. Israel’s government needs to realize that ignoring the Palestinian conflict and Arabs in Israel comes at a price. It is an ugly one that reared its racist head on Sunday at Damascus Gate.
Yaakov Katz, JPO, 29.05.22
On Jerusalem Day, love for the capital replaced by hatred towards Arabs
(…) armed forces ran up and down the alleyways, trying to catch their breath between clashes. The Jews and Arabs alike cursed the cops, while the officers tried to shoo everyone away, and keep the traffic of people moving. (…) over 20 thousand people visited the Western Wall (…) most of them came through the Damascus Gate (…) Jerusalem (…) deserves a special day annually, to honor it. It is a shame that the some among our nation, the far right and their supporters, hijacked this day and made it their own. The participants were overwhelmingly made up of right-wing Zionist religious Jews. It is their right, no one can argue that. But claiming ownership has a price. (…) Hatred towards Arabs has replaced love towards Jerusalem. And indeed, the Old City (…) looked occupied – stores were closed, people in uniforms flooded the streets, and hate was preached by all its residents. (…) On that same afternoon, The Ammunition Hill Heritage Site hosted an annual event for the IDF paratroopers‘ battalion, which lost 30 of its soldiers in the battles in Jerusalem 55 years ago. (…) Not one of them danced or celebrated on the hill, they commemorated the fallen soldiers, the hardships of the battles, and the effort to honor human lives even in times of war. A deep abyss stands between what took place at the Ammunition Hill and the events at the Damascus Gates, a divide that no dance or parade could compensate for.
Nahum Barnea, YED, 30.05.22
The truth about the Jerusalem Flag March
(…) the route of the march is the least important point in this debate. The insistence on the route is nothing but a smokescreen for the fact that the country is losing territory to the Palestinians in the south, in the north, and basically everywhere. Because we do not know why we are here, we have no strength to insist on our presence and fight for it. The pressure from the Palestinians and from the world has placed us in a position where we feel we must apologize for being here. If this is the case, then it is only a matter of time before Israel loses its Jewish majority. If we wave the Israeli flag without knowing what Israel means, then it is nothing but a political gesture. (…) Israel’s power depends on the strength of its spirit. If we know what our duty is and insist on carrying it out, nothing will defeat us. (…) Only when we stop fighting against each other and begin to restore the unity that our ancestors had once possessed will the world stop fighting and the nations will make peace with one another. Until then, nations will continue to blame us for their woes and accuse us of warmongering. (…)
Michael Laitman, TOI, 31.05.22
2. Schuldfrage für den Tod von Shireen Abu Akleh weiter ungeklärt
Während offizielle Untersuchungen kaum vorankommen, stellte der US-amerikanische Sender CNN eigene Nachforschungen zur Schuldfrage für den Tod der palästinensisch-amerikanischen Reporterin Shireen Abu Akleh an. Die Journalistin des katarischen TV-Senders Al-Jazeera war in Jenin unterwegs, als es dort zu einer Schießerei zwischen israelischen Soldat_innen und bewaffneten Palästinenser_innen kam. Beide Seiten machten sich anfangs gegenseitig für den tödlichen Kopfschuss verantwortlich. Israel räumte kurz danach ein, dass es auch eine israelische Kugel gewesen sein könnte, die die Reporterin tötete. Der amerikanische Sender CNN erhob nach einer Auswertung von Videoaufnahmen und Zeug_innenaussagen sogar den Vorwurf, die israelischen Kräfte hätten Abu Akleh gezielt getötet. Israel hatte von Beginn an eine gemeinsame Untersuchung angestrebt, scheiterte damit jedoch an mangelnder palästinensischer Kooperations-bereitschaft. Für weitere internationale Empörung sorgte zudem das gewaltsame Vorgehen der israelischen Polizei gegen einen Trauerzug für die Reporterin in Ostjerusalem. Mehr als 30 Menschen wurden verletzt, Abu Aklehs Sarg stürzte in dem Tumult beinah zu Boden. Grund für das polizeiliche Vorgehen waren palästinensische Flaggen, die den Sarg bedeckten und von den Trauernden gehisst wurden.
Why is Israel presumed guilty until proven innocent?
(…) Ever since the death of Al Jazeera reporter Shireen Abu Akleh, we have been bombarded with accusations left and right, with no end in sight. (…) we should have seen this coming the moment the journalist was killed. This crazy spiral that always (…) ends in Israel being slandered and the killing of Jews, surprises no one. (…) There is another way. The naivety of thinking, „If only we prove to the world that we are okay, it will not strike us,“ stems from a mentality similar to that of a spouse in an abusive relationship. So, if that is the case, why don’t we just stop giving a damn about what everyone thinks, and for once, just tell the truth as it is? This whole situation might have looked different had Israeli leaders said in unity after the journalist’s death: Her death is a tragedy. It is unclear who killed her, but we are certain that she – as a war reporter – knew the risks. If we had wanted to kill her, we could have done so in a sophisticated matter, but we did not. Moving on. (…) The state shouldn’t focus on how our actions might be perceived by the world, but on protecting our sovereignty and lives. If we will be condemned in any case, then we must make sure not to go down this path again, which always ends in the death of Jews.
Karni Eldad, IHY; 17.05.22
Abu Akleh case on social media: Where facts go to die
(..) If you ever wanted a case study in how quickly misinformation can spread, the death of Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh is a pristine example. (…) In the hours and days following Shireen’s death, footage from the scene of the tragic incident continued to be shared on social media. In one clip released by Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), they showed themselves opening fire nearby and claiming they hit a soldier. Meanwhile, Al Jazeera reported explicitly that “no Palestinians had opened fire” – which was 100% inaccurate, even by the Palestinians’ admission. It may be unlikely that the PIJ gunfire was responsible for the death of the journalist (…). However, multiple other clips at the scene show Palestinians believing that the victim (Abu Akleh) was not only male but an IDF soldier at first, only to realize it was a journalist. (…) We will only know after a thorough investigation – and perhaps not even then. (…) Thanks to social media, not only has the narrative spun out of control based on a completely unproven accusation, but now elected officials are even spouting off about consequences for Israel for an event (a murder) that didn’t happen. No matter who was responsible for the bullet that killed Abu Akleh, Palestinian terrorists or the IDF, it was not a murder nor was it an assassination. This inflammatory rhetoric is intended to ignite rage against Israel and, just as we saw last May, leads to antisemitic violence in Israel and abroad. These public figures have a responsibility to encourage dialogue and cooperation, not to exacerbate tensions. (…) It’s unfortunate that we live in an era where truth is more and more scarce, but that doesn’t always mean the truth won’t get out. (…)
Emily Schrader, JPO, 16.05.22
Israeli police’s conduct during slain reporter’s funeral is a national disgrace
(…) Security forces should have prepared accordingly to allow the funeral to pass quietly (…) and use violence means only as the very last resort. Not only because of the media coverage, but mainly because of the circumstances surrounding the reporter’s death. (…) Israel sees the raid in Jenin, where the reporter was killed, and any other operation in the volatile area of the Palestinian territories as an act of self-defense. But the world does not. International eyes will always see Israel as the aggressor. Blame will always fall on us. Israel’s fourth Prime Minister Golda Meir once said that Israel cannot forgive the Arabs for forcing us to kill their children. It seems Abu Akleh’s death conjures the same feeling of national guilt. Israel should have let the story of Abu Akleh’s death simply dissipate (…) without making a fuss out of some Palestinian flags being waved there. Instead, the Jerusalem police opted to force itself into East Jerusalem, and violently confront anyone who dared to wave the Palestinian flag or scream anti-Israel chants. As if waving a Palestinian flag during a two-hour funeral procession takes away from the Israeli sovereignty in the capital. (..) This is not the first time the Jerusalem District Police has caused a similar furor with its behavior. (…) The photos from the funeral – which among other things showed officers hitting the coffin-bearers with batons – are the complete opposite of patience and discretion. They showed the world a shocking display of unbridled brutality and violence. They showed the madness and moral failure of Israel’s police force.
Oded Shalom, YED, 20.05.22
It doesn’t matter who killed Shireen Abu Akleh, that’s the profession
(…) broadcast reporters have to be in the middle of the action, and though we’re trained to stay out of the way, sometimes we can’t. That’s the profession. Sometimes we get hurt. (…) it doesn’t matter who killed Al-Jazeera reporter Shireen Abu Akleh in the Jenin refugee camp. These days, truth doesn’t matter. (…) There are new rules (…) in today’s media jungle. Dedicated, traditional reporters still play by the old rules of fairness, context and dispassionate analysis – but they are overwhelmed and outshouted by media playing to their target audiences (…) and outlets that make no such claims, shamelessly and quickly scooping up any piece of information, real or fake, to promote their cause. (…) we have reached the point where a ban on identifying the race or ethnic origin of a criminal is forbidden unless it’s essential to the story, to an outright ban in all cases. I don’t know for a fact that there is such a formal ban, but once again, it doesn’t matter – that’s the reality. (…) New approaches are needed to make this a fair fight. (…)
Mark Lavie, YED, 22.05.22
Almodovar Said Something About Abu Akleh
(…) Artists, like everyone else, have opinions. So does Pedro Almodovar. (…) His opinion is respected and influential. But the death of the journalist affects us exactly like the deaths of others in the West Bank – in other words, not at all. Artists can exploit the platforms at their disposal in order to reach large audiences. Not here. Small country, small audience. (…) Ask an artist here for a political opinion and they’ll mouth the words: What do I know? (…) The power of the influencers is greater than that of the artists. Numbers don’t lie. A book by leading author Meir Shalev will sell some 10,000 copies but Alchimister has 1.7 million followers – and 1.7 million followers is equivalent to 30 representatives in the Knesset. Alchimister for prime minister! How many Knesset seats is Meir Shalev worth? (…). We didn’t see journalists demonstrating (…). You won’t find professional solidarity among us, and CNN and its investigation can go to hell. (…) Let me wax nostalgic for the days when killing a journalist would have led to a highly articulate, penetrating, tortured and proper reaction by writers David Grossman or Oz on the first page of the Yedioth Ahronoth daily. (…) where are the intellectuals? (…)
Yossi Klein, HAA, 29.05.22
Auf offener Straße fiel Hassan Sayad Khodayar, Mitglied der iranischen Revolutionsgarden (IRGC), in Teheran tödlichen Schüssen zum Opfer. Das Attentat ereignete sich in einem Viertel im Südosten der Hauptstadt. Das Opfer gehörte den al-Quds-Brigade an. Die Eliteeinheit gilt als besonders auf Auslandseinsätze spezialisiert. Die schiitischen Schattenkämpfer haben einige tausend Mann unter Waffen. Seit ihrer Gründung Anfang der 1980erjahre waren die Kämpfer der al-Quds-Brigade in vielen Ländern aktiv, unter anderem im Libanon, wo sie die Kämpfer der schiitischen Terrororganisation Hisbollah zu einer schlagkräftigen Truppe mit aufgebaut haben. Iranischen Medienangaben zufolge fuhren die Angreifer auf einem Motorrad vor das Haus von Hassan Sayad Khodayar, der in seinem privaten PKW gesessen haben soll, als er von den Schüssen überrascht und getötet wurde. Der Tathergang folgt einem bekannten Muster. Immer wieder werden hochrangige Militärs und Wissenschaftler des Atomforschungsprogramms Opfer gezielter Attentate. 2020 erwischte es den Kernphysiker Mohsen Fakhrizadeh. Die Regierung in Teheran macht für seinen Tod und den vieler anderer Israel verantwortlich.
Iran senior military official’s killing was preemptive intervention
Col. Hassan Sayyad Khodayar (…) may have (…) been the commander of a secret Iranian unit charge with planning and carrying out assassinations and attacks internationally, either in retaliation or as means to preemptively remove threats on Tehran and its regime. In recent years, Unit 840 operated under Khodayar’s directives mainly to attempt and harm Israelis and Israeli institutions across the world in order to avenge killings of Iranian nuclear scientists and other officials – all attributed to Israel’s secret service agency Mossad. (…) Khodayar’s preferred method to extract revenge was clandestine assassinations that couldn’t be traced back to the Iranian regime. But, the Iranian intelligence and Revolutionary Guard Corps have often made things difficult for Tehran on the international arena by carrying out sloppily executed attacks in Europe, South America, and Asia. (…) In recent years, the assassins have almost always been hired foreigners, usually recruited by Unit 840 operatives to carry out the deadly missions. (…) Among operations Khodayar and his men were responsible for in the past three years were the murders of Israelis in Tanzania, Ghana, and Senegal, as well as an attack on an Israeli institution in Colombia’s capital of Bogota. (…) Therefore, it is no wonder that after years of Khodayar acting as a senior officer in Unit 840, officials in the region have come to the conclusion that it is no longer possible to not preemptively defuse this ticking bomb. The concern was that one day he might be able to outsmart the Israeli intelligence and successfully execute one of his plans. (…)
Ron Ben-Yishai, YED, 23.05.22
Israel expands fight against Iran to include Tehran
(…) at the request of the United States, Israel has avoided its previous practice of attacking the Iranian nuclear program, and Iran is still proceeding with its race to obtaining a bomb. Col. Hassan Sayyad Khodayar who was shot five times outside his home in Tehran (…), was responsible for terrorism against Israeli and Jewish targets, which were foiled by Israel. (…) For Iran, his murder poses an additional blow to Iranian security and took place while the United States was still mulling the removal of the IRGC from its list of terror entities. (…) Fakhrizadeh was an expert in his field was hard to replace and his assassination was seen as a blow to the Iranian nuclear program. (…) Khodayar (…) was tasked with liaising between Iran and the Lebanon based Hezbollah terror group. (…)
Yossi Yehushua, YED, 23.05.22
Assassination of Iranian Colonel: A New Israeli Strategy
(…). Khodaei was known only to intelligence personnel as a key player at the tactical level in the Quds Force, whose main occupation lay in attempts (…) to attack Jewish and Israeli targets abroad. His assassination can’t be compared to previous operations, such as the pair of assassinations around two years ago of the commander of the Quds Force, Gen. Qasem Soleimani (…) and of the head of Iran’s military nuclear program, the scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh (…). Those two figures (…) were key players in the nuclear arena and in the subversion and arms smuggling that Iran carries out across the Middle East. (…) The main innovation this time would appear to be in the occupation of the person chosen as the target: terrorism. Four years ago, Bennett described what he termed Iran’s “octopus strategy”: the remote activation of proxies, which allows Tehran ambiguity, deniability, and above all -immunity from an Israeli response. Bennett called for the head of the octopus, Iran itself, to be targeted, and not to make do only with striking at its tentacles, namely Shi’ite militias in Syria and in some cases Hezbollah. The recent activity reflects an attempt to establish a new balance of forces against Iran: a systematic attack based on a policy of response. If Iran takes action or attempts to take action against Israeli targets, and is warned but continues with its actions, then an immediate price will be exacted, without any connection to the nuclear project. (…) The Iranians, in Jerusalem’s view, are for the most part judicious, cautious and rational in their activity. Repeated signals are understood clearly in Tehran. Iran itself, as has been seen in recent years, is relatively penetrable and vulnerable to intelligence activity and sabotage. If the message is sent enough times, it will be received. (…) Israel is engaged in a long-term strategic competition against Iran, which is not confined solely to the nuclear project. Accordingly, the policy needs to be far more coherent and comprehensive, and also take the long view.
Amos Harel, HAA, 27.05.22
Iran won’t be able to contain direct affronts for much longer
(…) Since the May 22 assassination of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Col. Hassan Sayyad Khodaei, Tehran has repeatedly vowed to exact revenge on Israel, which the Islamic republic has accused of the hit. A scenario by which Iran would target Israelis on Turkish soil is not far-fetched. Iran prefers to carry out extraterritorial operations in countries with which it has a land border as it facilitates the logistical preparations of such an operation. (…) However, Iran’s retaliation may not follow the „traditional“ line of targeting Israeli assets overseas. The „score“ Iran has to settle with Israel now includes the hit Khodaei and an explosion at Parchin military complex, which foreign media reports have attributed to Israel, as well as a series of other events, and this increasingly expanding list could force the Iranian leadership to seek another course of action. Should Iran decide to retaliate directly against Israel, it would have a choice between its missile and drone abilities and its actions over the past year have proved it has the operational ability to carry out such plans. (…) the public threats by high-ranking Iranian officials indicate that Tehran is committed to exacting revenge, so it is not a question of „if“ but of „when“ it decides to act. Israel’s goal at this time is to foil these nefarious intentions.
Danny Citrinowicz, IHY, 31.05.22
Streit um die palästinensische Flagge
Israel shouldn’t ban the Palestinian flag
(…) an inordinate amount of time and energy has been spent on flag-related issues: Sunday’s flag march in Jerusalem; last week’s battle of the Israeli vs. Palestinian flags at Ben-Gurion University; Israeli police confiscating Palestinian flags at Arab protests; Arabs ripping down Israeli flags on Independence Day. And (…) the flag issue is to make its way to the Knesset, where a bill (…) that would ban the display of “enemy flags” at universities and government institutions will come for a reading. (…) One issue with the bill is whether the Palestinian flag should be considered an “enemy flag.” Don’t we have relations with the PA? Haven’t we signed agreements with it? (…) Iran’s flag could be considered an enemy flag, as could Syria’s and – most certainly – Hamas’s flag and the flag of Islamic State. But should the PA’s banner be placed in the same category? (…) This is all just symbolic. Granted, symbols are important, but they are not all-important. If Israel wants to demonstrate real sovereignty in the capital, and not just a symbolic expression of it, how about enforcing the laws, including the municipal building code, throughout the city? (…) How about ensuring that Jews can walk safely in all parts of east Jerusalem, just as Arabs can stroll throughout the western part of the city? (…) A strong, confident country is not spooked or unnerved by someone else’s flag. Israel’s sovereignty is not at risk because of some Palestinian flags. It is at risk, however, in areas where – choosing the path of least resistance – it has opted not to be present.
Editorial, JPO, 30.05.22
Rinawie Zoabi erklärt Rücktritt als Abgeordnete
Zoabi and Silman, resignation is the honorable next step
Meretz MK Ghaida Rinawie Zoabi appears to be a person with principles, similar to her Yamina colleague MK Idit Silman. (…) The straw that broke the camel’s back, in her words, was the image of police officers clashing with Shireen Abu Akleh’s coffin bearers. (…) if the moral-ideological question is indeed what troubles her, she should have no dilemma regarding her political future. Very similar to Silman, she too must choose the simplest, most logical path – and hand in her resignation letter to the party chairman. (…) Now, however, with all due respect to her considerations, she doesn’t have a real dilemma on her hands. If Silman and Zoabi are women of honor, there’s only one thing to do: Step aside so that someone who is willing to do what they are not, can take their place.
Yossi Beilin, IHY, 22.05.22
Schwierige Einigung über Stipendien für ehemals Wehrpflichtige
The Likud should have voted for the IDF scholarship law -.
(…) after many nerve-racking hours of politicking and spins, amendment No. 24 to the Absorption of Discharged Soldiers Law (the Uniform to Studies Bill), brought to the Knesset by the government, was adopted by the Knesset. The amendment offers 75% of the higher education tuition in both academic and art institutions, from the state budget to all discharged soldiers, who have completed their military service – be they Jewish, new immigrants (…), Druze, Arab, Circassian, and lone soldiers. (…) But the Likud was not inclined to cooperate, though there were a few senior Likud MKs who argued that the Likud should not play politics over matters connected with benefits for soldiers. One of them was MK Yoav Galant – a reserve major general. (…) The Likud agreed, and decided to stay away from the vote, thus giving the government a 55-6 victory. (…) Sooner or later the government will fall. (…) the policy that Netanyahu has imposed on his party since the “government of change” was sworn in almost a year ago (…) is that the opposition should concentrate on one thing and one thing only: doing everything conceivable to delegitimize the government, and try to bring it down, even if this means opposing government bills that are good for the country, or which the Likud supports for ideological reasons. (…)
Susan Hattis Rolef, JPO, 29.05.22
HAA = Haaretz
YED = Yedioth Ahronoth / Ynetnews
JPO = Jerusalem Post
IHY = Israel HaYom
TOI = Times of Israel
GLO = Globes
Veröffentlicht im: Juni 2022
Dr. Paul Pasch,
Leiter der Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Israel