“Schlaglicht Israel” offers an insight into internal Israeli debates and reflects selected, political events that affect daily life in Israel. It appears every two weeks and summarizes articles that appeared in the Israeli daily press.
Main topics covered in this Publication:
- 50 Years Occupation
- Qatar and the Energy Crisis in the Gaza Strip
- Controversial Code of Ethics for University Lecturers
- Selection of Articles
The lesson of 1967
The 1967 Six-Day War was not the Arab militaries’ first defeat, but it was the most painful one. In 1948, the Arab armies failed to (…) prevent the establishment of the State of Israel (…) in 1967, the IDF conquered Sinai, the West Bank and the Golan Heights within just six days. (…) Egypt believed they would win. (…) From an Arab standpoint, the objective of war had changed: Up until 1967, the objective had been the (…) elimination of the State of Israel. From 1967 on, the goal was (…) to restore territories conquered by Israel in 1967 to Arab hands. (…) The defeat in 1967 led Egyptian President Anwar Sadat to take a different path — the path toward peace — which passed through the 1973 Yom Kippur War. (…) Jordan lost the West Bank for good. (…) Hussein lost his grasp on the West Bank, and in 1998, handed control over to the Palestinians. In retrospect, Jordan gained a great deal from the move. Jordan without the West Bank Palestinians was a more coherent entity, and without the West Bank, the Arab World’s attitude toward Jordan warmed considerably. After 1970, the Hashemite Kingdom’s military confrontations with Israel had ceased, and the eventual signing of the Israel-Jordan peace treaty in 1994 became a matter of time. Syria was left behind, with neither a peace deal nor the Golan Heights. Syria had come to understand the significance of Israeli military superiority, and as a result, the Israel-Syria border was calm after 1967. (…) It was only in the 1990s that Assad tried to strike peace with Israel, but by then, it was too late.
Ephraim Kam, IHY, 04.06.17
Reviving Israel: The 50th year challenge
Israel’s marking of the 50th anniversary of the 1967 War is replete with nostalgia and stocktaking, pathos and analysis, preening and significant self-criticism. The (…) country has undergone incredible changes but can boast little movement on the definition of its own identity; it has been transformed in many wondrous ways yet has been incapable of defining the parameters of its own existence. The (…) time has come to recognize the need to proactively restart the quest for an end to the conflict. (…) more than 80% of the Israeli military deployed in the West Bank is engaged in protecting Jewish settlements. (…) the need to reshape the process becomes paramount. (…) neither Abu-Mazen nor Bibi will be here forever: both are winding down long tenures in office with much less to show for their efforts than they would like. In the short term this offers a real incentive to move forward while they are still in charge; in the longer term it promises some movement on the bilateral front should they fail. (…) Israelis have the choice of persisting in a paralyzing passivity or taking matters into their own hands. The opportunity for a restart based on reconnecting with Palestinians, reshaping the nature of Israeli-Palestinian interactions and redesigning just and lasting solutions exists. (…) It is doable.
Naomi Chazan, TOI, 05.06.17
The 50-Year-old, ever-changing Status Quo
(…) The crushing defeat of the Arabs in 1967 (…) that should have ended the conflict yielded to the reality of an ever-lowering ceiling of a two-state solution. (…) Over 50 years of war-making and peace-making the conflict has metamorphosed from an “Arab-Israeli conflict,” to a “Palestinian-Israeli political process,” with Palestinians and Israelis as the principal antagonists. (…) Drastic changes have affected the regional balance of power, and we need new tools to deal with new realities. The same 50-year-old arguments dealing with this conflict will no longer do. (…)
Occupation, imposed deprivations and despair of seeing light at the end of the tunnel continue to be incompatible with stability or peace. Incitement, fanning prejudice and xenophobia are the operative policy of both Israel and the Palestinians. (…) Israel will not be compelled to end the occupation, but it can accept a historic compromise based on geo-strategic considerations that Israelis find compelling. It must find answers to the big questions about land, people and a secure, stable future. (…) The Palestinian polity headed by the PA and Hamas is fractured beyond hope. (…) Good governance means the rule of law and leadership that promotes public self-empowerment without which no people can thrive. No counterterrorism measure is more effective than good governance. (…) Our times call for global and regional statesmen and statewomen to inspire and lead people in conflict to work together and fight for an epoch-ending and epoch-making compromise, beyond victimhood toward a safe Middle East open to all its citizens. The real fight is between those who share this vision and those who oppose it.
Ziad J. Asali, JPO, 08.06.17
The disgrace of the occupation
(…) Settling in a foreign country through violent measures (…) is not worthwhile. (…) We have poured millions into the settlements over the past 50 years at the expense of Israeli taxpayers (…). The fruit of prosperity borne by this lost and deprived generation is now enjoyed by several thousand people who have become the masters of our fate.
(…) humane values that we meticulously maintained have worn out. In the culture of occupation, a soldier who fires a lethal bullet at a dying rival gains admiration and popularity. (…) The culture of occupation leads to internal hatred, leaving a region overflowing with empty words of cheap propaganda. The occupation has deprived the State of Israel of the possibility to lead its life with sovereign borders. (…) We are violating basic human rights: We are robbing lands from their Palestinian owners, we are imposing movement restrictions on the Palestinians within their home, we are not allowing them to use natural resources in their territories, and we use administrative detentions against them with no trial. (…) We have created two separate legal systems for Palestinians and for settlers who live on the same territory. (…) a people that enslaves another people will never be free. (…) right before our eyes, inside our home, dreadful things are happening. (…) The violence against the occupied is coming back at us like a boomerang. (…) In the modern era, we remain the only democracy with the stain of occupation. (…) All we can do is hope for salvation from the outside.
Sami Michael, YED, 05.06.17
A Trojan horse in the Sunni camp
Qatar is in no way a regular country. It is very small, but very rich. It’s not a superpower, but it has gall and audacity. It is conservative, but also daring. The Qatari royal family’s strategy (…) relied on attempting to grab hold of both ends of the stick (…): Build an enormous military base for the U.S. while flirting with Iran; fight terrorism while also funding Islamic State (…); preach against extremism while supporting the Muslim Brotherhood movement in any way possible; give Hamas a royal welcome, but hold unofficial talks with Israel (…) and mainly, to continuously stick their fingers into the internal affairs of other countries, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the Gulf states.
(…) The Saudis, who lead the Sunni camp, decided at last month’s Arab summit in Riyadh (…) that anyone who held talks with Iran and refused to declare Hezbollah a terrorist organization was an enemy. (…) the Qataris (…) will have to choose between regional isolation and more restrained policies. (…)
Oded Granot, IHY, 06.06.17
Qatar´s Crisis is Iran´s Opportunity
(…) the financial diminution of Hamas constitutes a double-edged sword which will require astute political management. Doha’s eviction of Hamas officials earlier this week also disrupts the organization’s strategic orientation, depriving it of Arab sponsorship. Qatar’s impending exit from the Palestinian arena, however, creates an opportunity for the re-entry of Iran. In May, the London-based Asharq al-Awsat reported that a deal (…) was reached in principle to restore Tehran’s financial support for the Hamas government. This would end the protracted tensions which emerged after Hamas backed the opposition to the Assad regime in 2012. (…) Iran’s upcoming re-entry into the Palestinian arena should be considered alongside its wider strategic projection across the Levant. The concentration of IRGC-backed militias in the Syrian Golan is critical to the contiguous territorial corridor Iran is developing from Tehran to Beirut. (…) renewed sponsorship of Sunni Islamists enables Iran to revive its pre-Arab Spring position of having a cross-sectarian agenda against Israel, shifting international perceptions away from its current Shi’ite proxy operations. Assuming Iran compensated Gaza’s rulers for the inevitable diplomatic fallout with Egypt (Gaza chief Yahya Sinwar was summoned to Cairo on June 4), Hamas would conceivably emerge as a potent unit in Iran’s incipient efforts to strategically encircle the Jewish state and upset American and Gulf efforts to broker a peace deal between Israel and the PA. Normalization of ties with Tehran would likely harden the group’s political positions, where Qatar had previously served as a moderating force. (…) Iranian sponsorship could radicalize Hamas as it did during the second intifada, bolstering its ambitions to usurp the authority of the PLO. (…)
Sapan Maini-Thompson, JPO, 13.06.17
Gaza marks unhappy Anniversary – 10 Years under Hamas Rule
(…) This week is the 10th anniversary of the bloody Hamas coup that enabled the creation of an Islamist, terrorist quasi- state on Israel’s southern border. It is an anniversary that few Gazans can celebrate. (…) It had alternatives. When Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005 it left behind millions of dollars’ worth of hothouses that could have been used to grow produce. Instead they were used to grow rockets and roadside bombs and to hide entrances to cross-border attack tunnels into Israel. Due to this continued focus on terrorism, Hamas has succeeded in achieving the highest unemployment rate in the world for a population that has electricity for only a few hours a day and lacks a regular supply of drinking water. Hamas has used its 10-year rule to turn Gaza into the very prison camp its supporters accuse Israel of running. Instead of using the foreign aid funds that support its rule to build homes to replace those destroyed in the 2014 war it provoked with Israel, the terrorist leadership diverts essential construction materials to rebuilding its network of attack tunnels for another pointless round, in an apparent attempt to divert public attention from its abuse of power. (…) Israel, for its part, has warned the UN that Gaza is on the brink of either a water or an electricity crisis – or both. (…) Gaza shares a border with Egypt which should take responsibility for the Palestinians. The problem is that Cairo doesn’t want that headache. (…) A decade after seizing Gaza, Hamas is a complete failure on all accounts. It doesn’t provide for its people and it doesn’t succeed in its sworn mission to destroy Israel. (…)
Editorial, JPO, 11.06.17
The Qatari facade
(…) Qatar is constantly wary of betrayal, coups and the external usurping of its treasures, while on the other hand, it is constantly trying to use its wealth to influence the world. Tiny Qatar’s wealth stems from its huge oil and gas deposits, discovered by Westerners. (…) The corrupt emirate’s operatives buy off university chairs to rewrite history and acquiring degrees and influence in the West; they buy their way into hosting world events; they bribe envoys in the United Nations and European Union to vote against Israel, all while the wealthy Gulf nation fails to offer any assistance or asylum to the millions of Muslim refugees in the Middle East. (…) Qatar (…) gives al-Qaida, Islamic State and their ilk billions of dollars under the pretence of “ransom” paid to release hostages held by the terrorist groups. (…) U.S. President Donald Trump’s demand that Qatar stop financing terrorism will most likely put an end to the latter’s forbidden romance with the enemy. (…)
Reuven Berko, IHY, 11.06.17
And then the power was cut in the children’s hospital in Gaza
(…) Since the only power station in the Strip stopped operating a month and a half ago, due to a political conflict, Gaza is left mainly with electricity purchased in Israel (…). The electricity shortage affects all areas of life in the Strip. Routine everyday activities, such as sanitation, laundry, cooking and showers are severely affected, as is of course the use of telephones and computers. (…) The pumps that channel water into the houses are now working only part-time; there are areas where there is water distribution only once a week. There has been a dramatic decline in the activity of water purification stations; the pumping of sewage in communities and neighborhoods has been totally or partially discontinued; millions of liters of untreated sewage are flowing to the beach, which is the residents’ refuge from their daily travails. The electricity shortage is no longer a temporary inconvenience, but a potential health hazard, and in any case it isn’t a sustainable situation. (…)
Mohammed Azaizeh, HAA, 05.06.17
Striking the right balance
Hamas, the terrorist organization that rules the Gaza Strip, is under pressure from three sides. The first and most important stems from Qatar’s being forced to sever ties with it, expelling several of its leaders (…). If Qatar ceases to provide economic aid to the Gaza Strip due to this pressure, residents of Gaza and Hamas will have lost what has been their primary source of help in recent years. The second source of pressure is from Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas (…) the PA will reduce or has already significantly reduced salaries to people it considers its enemies in Gaza (…). Abbas has also decided not to pay for a large portion of the electricity that Gaza consumes, subsequently leading to the Israeli cabinet’s decision on Sunday to reduce the amount of electricity Israel transfers to Gaza. As a result, the people of Gaza will be left without electricity for much of the time. (…) All these factors will lead to immense pressure on the Gaza Strip in general and on Hamas, which is responsible for Gaza, in particular. (…) Israel has a very large interest in pressuring Hamas to sacrifice its military investments. On the other hand, the worse the situation in Gaza becomes, and the less Hamas has to lose, the more the risk of a violent outburst from inside Gaza grows. This outburst will be aimed at Israel rather than Hamas. (…) How can pressure be applied without causing an eruption? To do so is an art form, and it is very difficult to provide good advice. (…)
Yaakov Amidror, IHY, 13.06.17
Who determines what’s ‘political’
(…) Indeed, the proposal is totally misguided. It poses a threat to academic freedom and freedom of expression, and includes elements of Zhdanovism and McCarthyism. It poses serious dangers not just to academia, but to Israeli society as a whole. (…) Imagine a lecturer who speaks to his students about Israel being a democratic state – or perhaps Jewish and democratic – that is fulfilling the Zionist vision, and that the Declaration of Independence and basic laws constitute a basis for effective protection of civil rights within it. (…) That same lecturer will state that Israel was established through the dispossession of the Palestinian people, as expressed by the Nakba, and that even today, despite the clause in the Declaration of Independence about equality, and despite the basic laws, Israel is essentially an “ethnocracy,” not a democracy. Such a lecturer is likely to be perceived as dealing with politics during his classes and if Kasher’s code is adopted, he could face disciplinary measures. (…) Good teaching is never preaching and it’s always worthwhile to present the different sides in every debate. But the reality is such that the presentation of one side of the story alone is usually not seen as a political act if that side is identified with the status quo, while the very fact of presenting the other side of the story is seen as a political act. An important part of critical thinking, which is important not just to academia but to society at large, is to question and cast doubt on whether what exists is indeed inevitable, and to expose false necessities. But casting such doubts is considered a political statement, while backing the status quo will generally not be perceived as such. (…) it’s a mistake to understand the code that comes from the school of Habayit Hayehudi’s Naftali Bennett only in terms of undermining various rights. It must be understood as part of the effort to normalize the status quo and present it as the only option. (…)
Aeyal Gross, HAA, 13.06.17
Reject the academic code of ethics
I call on everyone who holds dear the future, integrity and welfare of Israeli science and academia, in all the institutions of higher education, to condemn Prof. Asa Kasher and to boycott his creation: the code of ethics for universities. Ethics in academia and scientific institutions depends on one sacred principle from which it stems — academic freedom. Safeguarding and administering the rules of ethics in these institutions must always be the exclusive responsibility of scientists and academics, completely free of external pressures of any kind. (…) It’s clear that systematic partisan indoctrination in a classroom by teachers is not protected by academic freedom. Lectures and course materials must be free of controversial opinions that are not part of what is being studied. But the document called the code of ethics for universities, which was drafted at the request of a political entity, must be treated as an invasion that pollutes the foundations of ethics in scientific institutions and academia. (…) As one of the pioneers in the study of German academia during the transition to Nazi rule, I want to issue a warning. (…) Let us not lend a hand to the real threat to the future of Israeli science and academia.
Arik Carmon, HAA, 12.06.17
Academic freedom is off limits
(…) universities and colleges fall under the jurisdiction of civilian society. They are not state bodies. Israel needs higher education to develop its human and economic capital, which is why it partially funds most of these institutions. This does not give the education minister the authority to interfere in classrooms and how they are run. (…) Education Minister Naftali Bennett’s motive is to police what is said in classrooms. (…) This issue is better left to the universities and colleges themselves. Some already have their own ethical codes, which is strictly within their own purview. (…) this document (…) invites students with different views to turn to law enforcement agencies and complain their lecturer merely voiced an opinion. Even if these complaints lead nowhere, they will adversely impact lecturers’ willingness to participate in the public discourse in Israel. Academics should not have to conceal their academic affiliations or professional background in order to avoid being accused of “political activity.” The document also (…) seeks to restrict research fields and even accepted research methodologies. (…) With all due respect, academic freedom allows me to research what I want, in whatever field I please, and to seek publication wherever I see fit — as long as it is within the law. Only professional considerations, not any code of ethics, will guide me or my colleagues on these matters. (…) In the best case scenario, these directives will all die and be forgotten upon arrival. In the worst case, however, they will open the door to an endless stream of petitions and will encourage students to see forbidden “political activity” where it does not even exist.
Doron Shultziner, IHY, 12.06.17
A blow to freedom, a step towards fear
(…) Living in a free society is a privilege that can never be taken for granted, as there are always forces, both internal and external, fighting to undermine it. On the domestic front, a culture of fear can take root when extremists are permitted to take command and to intimidate, undermining freedom even within a society pledged to defend it. This threat arises when legitimate differences of opinion (…) begin to be perceived wrongly as black and white. (…) Once this happens, freedom is jeopardized (…) This is the way a fear society attempts to maintain a constant pool of true believers. (…) Any type of censorship inevitably results in stagnation, which impedes the development of fresh and deep ideas. (…) Once a society starts to slide down this slippery slope from a freedom to a fear society, it must maintain increasingly tight control, which inevitably triggers a process of decay. Our information society is dependent on the free flow and exchange of ideas. Why would we voluntarily give up any of our precious freedoms when it would lead to the inevitable fate of all fear regimes: stagnation, regression and eventual collapse? (…) In free societies, the university should stand as an open meeting ground for the marketplace of ideas. It is the place where all concepts and ideas can be aired and debated, with no consequence for expressing the “wrong” opinion (…). Before it is too late, all of those who understand the value — and fragility — of a free society must stand up to any misguided attempts to chip away at its very foundations: freedom of thought and freedom of expression. Nowhere is this more important than in academia, where even the most controversial ideas should not be censored. (…)
Alisa Rubin Peled, TOI, 12.06.17
Trump is a hazard
(…) Donald Trump is a serious hazard – to his country, to the free world and to us too. (…) The United States has been taken over by a provincial, shallow, populist person hungry for sweeping love and immediate gratification. Trump has no wisdom or worldview of his own. (…) His political and strategic doctrine is glorifying his name (…)
Even leftist Israeli leaders who met Trump’s staff said his initiative is serious. Allow me to be of little faith. Such a one-sided character who can’t understand the nuances of Israeli-Palestinian relations and scolds Mahmoud Abbas for incitement while not criticizing Benjamin Netanyahu for the occupation and oppression can’t achieve a solution.
Trump’s position will endanger the Sunni alliance as well. (…) If Trump wanted to help solve the conflict, he should have studied and understood the battlefield’s conditions rather than assume that a pincer movement could bring about an agreement. (…) the Saudi initiative preceded Trump and is still alive and kicking. It’s Netanyahu who’s supposed to choose between it and Naftali Bennett to his right (…)
Uzi Baram, HAA, 01.06.17
Trump’s international debacles spell trouble for Israel
President Donald Trump’s recent (…) withdrawal from the Paris Accords on Climate Change, should be setting off alarm bells in Israel. (…) Israel prizes its close partnership with Germany, which Chancellor Angela Merkel has done much to nurture; maintains close, if at times cooler, ties with France and the United Kingdom, and has built very friendly relations with the newer democracies of Central and Eastern Europe.(…) So what happens when the United States, Israel’s closest ally and the longtime leader of the Western bloc, seems to be actively distancing itself from those partners? (…) First it will significantly diminish the United States’s effectiveness in standing up for Israel to deter unfriendly European initiatives. (…) Second, the perception of US strength and its credibility as a reliable ally are critical Israeli assets. (…) turning away from its closest allies, withdrawing from signed agreements, and calling into question solemn commitments, does Israel no favors. (…) Israel has always defined its closeness to the United States, first and foremost, as reflecting and advancing the two nations’ common values. (…) But if the common values are not prized, Israel will lose its special connection and status with the United States, and will find itself forced into agonizing dilemmas. Can Prime Minister Netanyahu be comfortable identifying with a Trump-led camp that includes Putin, Erdogan, and Duterte, but leaves out Merkel, Macron, and Trudeau? Frustrations with Europe on the Palestinian issue aside, no Israeli I know wants to have to choose sides between these camps.
Daniel Shapiro, TOI, 04.06.17
Be nice, ladies, if you want to win
The election for Histadrut labor federation head seemed to be one of the most disgusting things to happen around here lately. (…) That a leading female politician lost may say more about the challenges women in politics face when they enter an arena dominated by men than it does about this particular female candidate’s qualifications for office. (…) Yacimovich is not a nice person. (…) She’s also a deal-maker, making and breaking alliances. Members of her inner circle sometimes become her bitter enemies, and her bitter enemies become her most bitter enemies. So far, there’s nothing here that’s absent in any politician aiming for the top. But the public – including, unfortunately, women as well – just can’t stand those characteristics when the politician in question is a woman. (…) Although she is intelligent, a go-getter and courageous, voters eventually reject her again and again and give in to the incitement of her rivals. Beyond the circle of her loyal supporters, there is no critical mass to come to her defense. (…) As long as female politicians serve as second fiddles to the opinions of some leader, as long as they are nice, smiling and pleasant (…), they are sympathetic and constitute photogenic proof of the success of feminism. The moment they start to amass power and try to use it, they are subjected to character assassination. Shelly Yacimovich was subject to character assassination.
Ravit Hecht, 01.06.17
Israel’s Superwoman Gal Gadot – Wonder Woman´s Message
Gadot’s popularity in the world triggers so much pride precisely because Israelis are so used to experiencing the opposite. If there is anything blatantly political about Wonder Woman it is the film’s statement on gender roles, not Gal Gadot’s nationality. (…) In a male-dominated industry in which the vast majority of directors are men, and women tend to be the ones being saved, not doing the saving, it was refreshing for women to enjoy a film that breaks that mold (…). in recent days the controversy surrounding the film shifted from a discourse about gender to a focus on where Gadot was born and raised. Lebanon’s government was the first to back down to BDS activists and ban screenings of Wonder Woman. Tunisia and Algeria followed suit. (…) the ban of Wonder Woman will not hurt the career of Gadot or delegitimize Israelis or the Jewish state. On the other hand it will underline how close-minded and authoritarian these nations are. It will also deny millions of Lebanese, Tunisians and Algerians some good fun out at the movies. It just so happens that Wonder Woman has received rave reviews and broken box-office records. (…) the countries denying theaters the right to screen Wonder Woman will also be preventing their men and women from being exposed to a very different female character. The feminist message of Wonder Woman is particularly pertinent to the Middle East, where so many women remain under male dominance and are less free than men. (…) It is unfortunate that the hatred for Israel expressed in some Muslim countries takes precedence over any other concern. (..) The depth of hatred directed against Israel and Israelis might also explain another phenomenon unique to Israel: Israelis’ outburst of pride at the success of Gadot as though it were their own. No other people is so quick to take credit for another countryman’s success. But then again no other people sees its fellow citizens treated so shabbily. (…)
Editorial, JPO, 08.06.17
Terror in England – Between the Thames and the Nile
(…) Europe is currently paying the price for its strategic failure to understand the reality and culture of the Middle East, as it faces waves of terrorism and an influx of immigrants. The war against terrorism must be decisive, and at times, this entails infringing on individual liberties and imposing restrictions on the media, when it caters to terror organizations. (…) The West needs to implement a three-tiered strategy involving a determined struggle against radical Islamic groups in the West; economic and security assistance to moderate Sunni regimes such as Egypt and Jordan in order to maintain their stability and assist them in fighting radical Islam at home and abroad; and a combined military, diplomatic and economic effort to rehabilitate failed countries such as Libya and Yemen, to prevent them from developing into a breeding ground for terrorist groups.
Shaul Shay, IHY, 05.06.17
Gay-Parade in Tel Aviv – The Dark Side of the Rainbow
As pride month begins around the world, I am disappointed to admit that even as an openly queer individual, I cannot fully celebrate it with my international LGBT community, as fractions of my community are still fighting against me. (…) Simply because of my nationality. Being an Israeli secular Jew, half African, half Iraqi and queer, I know oppression all too well. I’ve experienced the challenges of acceptance at every stage of my life. (…) But when I was first attacked by members of the international LGBT community for my nationality I was caught off guard. (…) what does this conflict have to do with the progress that the Israeli LGBT community has made, and why can’t we celebrate it? (…) I, too, am very critical of my country’s government actions and politics, (…) yet, to use the same logic, if the leader of a country is a racist, sexist, patriarchal bigot that was quoted saying terrible things about women, is in favor of banning Muslims from entering his country and mocks the disabled, should we all boycott this country’s people? (…) These are dark times in the Middle East, especially for the LGBT communities. Minorities are under daily attacks and the LGBT community is under daily attack in most Arab and Muslim countries – where being gay may get you the death penalty. Today more than ever, we must be united as one community. (…) This is what we are all about – coming together against discrimination, against bigotry, against hate.
Hen Mazzig, JPO, 11.06.17
HAA = Haaretz
YED = Yedioth Ahronoth / Ynetnews
JPO = Jerusalem Post
IHY = Israel HaYom
TOI = Times of Israel
GLO = Globes
Published in: June 2017
Dr. Werner Puschra,
Head of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Israel