Jerusalem Post brings Israeli policy views to NYC

Over 1000 journalists, students, and individuals filled the conference room at the Marriott Marquis Hotel in Times Square this past Sunday for the Jerusalem Post second annual conference to hear former and current Israeli government ministers, military men and journalists opine on issues affecting the Jewish State.

The audience listened attentively for most speakers but became rowdy, alternatively booing, heckling and cheering when former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and professor and attorney Alan M. Dershowitz spoke of what they perceived as the need for Israel to make further concessions for peace.

The conference began with individual addresses followed by three consecutive panel discussions. Much of the talks focused on the threats emanating from Iran, verbal threats calling for Israel’s destruction, the exporting of terror from Iran, and its development of nuclear capability and the potential for a nuclear bomb.

Amos Yadlin, a former head of IDF Military Intelligence Directorate, pointed out that the CIA predicted in 1948 that Israel wouldn’t last two years and, in spite of many obstacles and dire outlooks over the years, Israel has continued to grow and thrive. He warned against drawing a “red line,” stressing that it allows Israel’s “enemies to maneuver around it and do anything that is not acceptable but not cross the red line.” He said Iran can have 56,000 centrifuges in Natanz and 50 tons of uranium but take another tack and “break out in a week.” Yadlin recounted sitting in the briefing room with astronaut Ilan Ramon in 1981 before the attack on the Osirak reactor in Iraq discussing the advisability of attempting to destroy the reactor if Iraq can buy another one. “Thirty years later they still don’t have a reactor in Iraq,” said Yadlin.

Uzi Arad, former national security adviser to the prime minister, suggested “acting before the problem arises,” that “Iran’s drive to get weapons is strong” and the need for a “strong force to keep it in check.” He suggested “quietly and discretely” communicating to the Iranians “certain and eminent strikes against Iran, clearer communication with explicit time deadlines and pressures.”

Caroline Glick, a senior fellow for the Center for Security Policy and senior contributing editor for The Jerusalem Post, addressed the boycott, divest and sanctions (BDS) movement in the U.S. She began speaking by summing up her views on Iran, “I don’t think there is anything more to say save for bombs away!” She condemned Jews who support the BDS movement whose goal is the destruction of Israel. She said supporters of BDS either don’t like Israel and identify with the BDS movement or are ignorant fools. “Why not Venezuela, Cuba or France?” she asked. She called on Jewish students at schools that support BDS “to stand up for themselves…stand up for us.”

Israel’s ambassador to the United States, Michael B. Oren, emphasized that, “Israel is not urging or recommending any policy on Syria. If the U.S. does provide lethal aid to the rebels in Syria, (they should) vet them carefully…in Libya (the weapons) were used against Israel. Israel will not remain passive if the weapons (get) to Hizbullah.” He noted that President Obama “reiterated Israel’s right to defend itself” on his recent trip to Israel, noting the Jewish people’s roots going back 3000 years and their unassailable right to self-determination. Oren said that Israel is “one state, militarily and economically robust, relentlessly democratic, and proudly and unabashedly pro-American.” He also quoted Obama who stated that, “Israel was not created because of the Holocaust but the existence of a strong Jewish state will insure that the Holocaust will not happen again.”

In a panel discussion, “two states for two peoples?” Dr. Yuval Steinitz, Minister of Intelligence, International Relations and Strategic Affairs, cited the “greatest problem as the consistent refusal (of the Palestinians, Arabs) to recognize as it is as a Jewish State” that they have to “recognize their (Israel’s) right to exist as a homeland of the Jewish people.” Steinitz noted that Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority) won’t even mention the Jews since that would be admitting that the Jews are even a people. Steinitz further stressed the need for no preconditions in any negotiations.

Dershowitz said that he wanted Israel to be secure and “recognized as the State of the Jewish people, judged by a single standard and praised for its accomplishments.” He quoted the first Rashi (a Biblical commentator) in Genesis, as to the rights of the Jews to the Land of Israel, and the Jews’ history there, and yet, to pronounced denouncing from the audience, stated that the Arabs have a claim to the land as well and put forward a plan involving concessions.

Arad countered that there must be no unilateral concessions and once an agreement is reached, that should be the “end of the conflict with no further claims.” They (the Arabs) have to give something for something, he said, they should halt their international activities. “If they don’t recognize Israel as a Jewish State, it cries out loudly that they will have further claims. Even if they agree they will not mean it.”

Yadlin pointed out previous negotiating errors including unilateral agreements, leaving the Arabs a corridor for weapons, such as the Philadelphi corridor. He noted the necessity of putting a peace plan to a vote with Israeli conditions and the current risk of “losing the Negev and Galil to the Palestinians; we have to protect our country and not (rely) on the mercy of the Palestinians.”

“You can’t give up the store to the Palestinians,” retorted Glick. She said that it’s not just an issue of security, that Israel has to state the fact that it is Israel’s land and has to be willing to “stand by your rights.” She cited the “Palestinian directive” of why they would “never accept a Jewish State.” If they “do then that’s giving credence to the maximalist Jewish view to the 1949 mandate and the League of Nations mandate. They can never give recognition….It’s not going to stop because we can appease them. It’s not going to work.” She was involved with the agreement negotiations in 1994-1996, she said, and there was “not one issue they abided by, none mattered, they were not keeping any of the agreements, it’s all a lie.” She noted that the PA has been “indoctrinating” and “seeks the murder of men, women, and children. (You) can’t make peace with people whose national identity is the negation of your national identity.”